Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples 9789287178336, 9789287176363
159 99 3MB
English Pages 215 Year 2012
Polecaj historie
Citation preview
Youth
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
# 17
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts Policies, approaches and examples
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts Policies, approaches and examples
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Editors: Günter J. Friesenhahn (Editor-in-Chief) Hanjo Schild Hans-Georg Wicke Judit Balogh Editorial assistance: Christina Plantz
Council of Europe Publishing
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
The opinions expressed in this work are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily refect the offcial policy of the European Commission or the Council of Europe, their member states or the organisations co-operating with the institutions.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated, reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic (CD-Rom, Internet, etc.) or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the Directorate of Communication (F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex or [email protected]).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
To receive further information about the Partnership between the European Commission and the Council of Europe in the feld of youth, please visit our website at http://youth-partnership-eu.coe.int or contact us by e-mail at [email protected].
Cover photo courtesy of JUGEND für Europa – Deutsche Agentur für das EU-Programm JUGEND IN AKTION Cover design: Documents and Publications Production Department (SPDP), Council of Europe Layout: Jouve, Paris Council of Europe Publishing F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex http://book.coe.int ISBN 978-92-871-7636-3 © Council of Europe and the European Commission, May 2013 Printed at the Council of Europe
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
7 3
Contents 1
Introduction: learning mobility and non-formal learning ..........................
5
Günter J. Friesenhahn, Hanjo Schild, Hans-Georg Wicke, Judit Balogh
I 2
Developments and political framework ..........................
11
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework ...............
13
Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis
3
European Union support to learning mobility: rationale of a success ........
25
Pascal Lejeune
4
Advocating for youth: the European Youth Forum helping to increase recognition of mobility and non-formal learning ......................................
33
David Garrahy
5
Youth mobilities, step by step ...................................................................
39
Majo Hansotte
6
Cross-border youth mobility, meeting the neighbours, learning from each other: international exchanges of young Poles and their peers from abroad .....................................................................................................
47
Aleksandra Karlin´ska
7
Learning mobility in the youth feld: the Estonian experience with a European imprint .....................................................................................................
55
Reet Kost
8
What are the effects of international youth mobility projects? Research-based analysis of Youth in Action........................................................................
63
Helmut Fennes
II 9
Concepts and approaches concerning mobility and learning ...........................................................................
71
International youth work in Germany .......................................................
73
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Andreas Thimmel
10
A comparative framework for youth mobility............................................
81
Günter J. Friesenhahn
11
Preconditions for movement in Portugal and Ireland: social inequality, mobility feld and habitus.........................................................................
89
David Cairns
12
Mobility as a pedagogical tool for young people with fewer opportunities
97
Søren Kristensen
13
Challenges for recognition of non-formal learning and learning mobility in Ukraine: education, labour market and society ........................................ Yaryna Borenko
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
103
4
14
Youth mobility: towards more self-directed and holistic learning ..............
109
Marta Brzezin´ska-Hubert
15
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts ................................................................................ 117 Judith Dubiski
III
Good practice and project reports .................................. 129
16
European youth mobility and inclusion among those with fewer opportunities through three mechanisms ....................................................................... 131 Nagla Abed, Judith van Raalten
17
Sharing the mobility experience: creating more effect. Comparison of the effects on young people of two Dutch learning mobility programmes ......
139
Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens
18
Opening talent in young people: the role of non-formal learning in the UK Foyer Network.......................................................................................... 149 Steve Hillman
19
Facilitating learning mobility for all: the JiVE experience ..........................
157
Bettina Wissing
20
EFIL’s European Citizenship Trimester Programme: from global to European Active Citizenship ....................................................................................
165
Elisa Briga
21
Youthpass the educational practice...........................................................
173
Rita Bergstein, Kristiina Pernits
22
Experiential learning in youth mobility programmes: a tool to plan, monitor and evaluate............................................................................................. 181 Tamara Thorpe, Jennifer Watson
23
Evaluation of international youth exchanges .............................................
189
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Wolfgang Ilg List of abstracts .........................................................................................
199
List of editors and authors ........................................................................
207
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Günter J. Friesenhahn, Hanjo Schild, Hans-Georg Wicke, Judit Balogh
Introduction: learning mobility and non-formal learning
T
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
he Council of Europe (since the mid1960s), the European Commission (since the late 1980s) and many European states and civil society organisations (in the aftermath of the Second World War) have long fostered programmes and strategies to enhance the mobility of young people.1
The prevailing notion of such programmes is that the process of economic and political integration in Europe will indeed remain fragmentary and unstable without accompanying social and educational measures. Instead of a Europe with non-transparent bureaucratic institutions, a “Europe of Citizens” was meant to develop wherein people would get to know each other, appreciate their mutual cultural differences and, at the same time, form a European identity by saying “yes” to core European values. As such, mobility is considered important for the personal development of young people, contributing as it does to their employability and thus their social inclusion.
1. This introduction refers partly to a text by Elisa Briga: http://youth-partnership-eu.coe.int/youthpartnership/ekcyp/BGKNGE/Mobility, accessed 30 January 2013.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
6
These programmatic aims are increasingly confronted with the economic situations in some European countries where the unemployment rate among young people reaches nearly 50%.
But mobility is also important since it is considered to enhance intercultural competences and to contribute to the development of participation and active citizenship. In this respect, the learning dimension in mobility schemes is crucial: learning mobility in the youth feld focuses on non-formal learning as a relevant part of youth work with links to informal learning as well as to formal education; it is understood as physical and organised learning mobility but does not neglect virtual mobility, which facilitates and supports physical mobility experiences.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
From an institutional perspective, the Council of Europe was the frst intergovernmental organisation to address the phenomenon of learning mobility at the European level; when the youth sector started opening up in the mid-1960s, youth mobility was included among its major themes. It is about an inclusive policy in the European context. It is about exercising rights to disadvantaged social groups to give equal rights to everyone independent of gender, generation, sexuality, disability, ethnic background and faith. Inclusive policy implies education, training, housing, equal resources for the disabled, immigrants and participation (democratisation). Inclusive policy is about equal rights for everyone and efforts to eliminate injustice. An inclusive policy is about social cohesion, which is a political term. It underlines the essentials for the attainment of the three core values of the Council of Europe: human rights, democracy and constitutional legality. It is a matter of how to develop and strengthen social relationships and provide access for all to educational and social programmes. The frst initiatives in this feld were the European Agreement on Travel by Young Persons on Collective Passports (1961) and the European Agreement on “au pair” Placement (1969). In 1972, the European Youth Foundation (EYF) was established to provide fnancial support for European youth activities which serve the promotion of peace, understanding and co-operation among young people in Europe. From the mid-1980s, youth mobility became a permanent part of the agenda of the ministerial conferences and the number of texts covering specifc aspects of mobility increased with the mobility of youth workers and local policies to promote mobility. In particular, in the 1990s the Council of Europe took important steps towards the promotion of youth mobility by founding the European Youth Card Association (EYCA) as well as the Solidarity Fund for Youth Mobility (now Mobility Fund by Rail for the Young and the Disadvantaged) and by adopting two recommendations, one on youth mobility, and another on the promotion of a voluntary service. Today, the most relevant political document for youth, The Future of the Council of Europe Youth Policy: AGENDA 2020, includes support for the development of youth mobility, which is also encouraged in the Committee of Ministers Recommendation on the participation of young people in local and regional life, wherein an entire article is dedicated to the role of local and regional authorities in the policy for mobility and exchanges. Following mobility schemes for young workers in the framework of the European Social Fund in the 1960s, the European Union started at the end of the 1980s to promote youth exchanges through specifc funding programmes such as Erasmus (1987) and Youth for Europe (1989). The Treaty on the European Union, signed in Maastricht in 1992, states that Community action should also be aimed at “encouraging the development of youth exchanges and of exchanges of socioeducational instructors”. Youth mobility became an asset of the EU youth policy
Günter J. Friesenhahn, Hanjo Schild, Hans-Georg Wicke, Judit Balogh
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
1 7
due to the further development of funding programmes promoting mobility, such as the European Voluntary Service. The White Paper “A new impetus for European Youth” (2001) underlined the importance of the recognition of specifc skills gained through mobility experiences, and youth mobility emerged as a transversal policy which has to be taken into consideration in other policy felds. One of the main focuses of the youth mobility programmes was the inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities. Several important policy documents have been produced on the topic of youth mobility, including the European Quality Charter for Mobility (2006), the Council of the European Union’s Recommendation on the Mobility of Young Volunteers Across the European Union (2008), the Council’s conclusions on youth mobility (2008) and the European Commission’s Green Paper on “Promoting the learning mobility of young people” (2009). The promotion of youth mobility is also included in the Council of the European Union’s Resolution on a renewed framework of cooperation in the youth feld (2010-2018). These developments paved the way to the Youth on the Move initiative as one of the seven fagship initiatives in the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the European Union.2 The strategy is the answer of the EU to the high youth unemployment rate and aims at preparing young people to face future economic challenges. The main idea behind Youth on the Move is that learning mobility is an important way for young people to enhance their development as active citizens, and strengthen their future employability both by acquiring new professional competences and developing a positive attitude towards mobility. Therefore, mobility is seen as a key instrument to prepare young people to live in the society of the future, and to be open to new ideas and opportunities. In some chapters in this book (e.g. Cairns, Chapter II) it is underlined that attitudes towards mobility are changing due to the living conditions in some European countries. It is rather the habitus of a family than the attractiveness of European programmes which has a decisive impact on the mobility of young people. Overlapping reasons are seen in the consequences of fnancial crises. What remains to be explored in this analysis are the infuences upon mobility decision making, including migration to other countries. The most obvious answer is the neoclassical economic explanation: young people move to pursue better career opportunities and/or to escape what may be diffcult fnancial circumstances at home.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
On the other hand, fndings from other research on the mobility of students and young apprentices consistently show the following outcomes: • increase of self-confdence and enhancement of social competences; • gaining intercultural competences; • improvement of foreign-language skills; • sustainable signifcance of the mobility experience for personal development.
The debate on youth mobility goes on and encompasses related policy felds, particularly employment and education. There are obvious links among these different sectors, but the youth sector also claims its own specifcity and identity. Obviously, there is no clear common understanding as to what is considered youth work in the European countries. Nevertheless, we need a common basis, especially in the feld of youth mobility. Therefore, we stress the importance of linking the rationale
2. See: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-a-nutshell/fagship-initiatives/index_en.htm.
Introduction: learning mobility and non-formal learning
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
8
and the spirit of the Declaration of the 1st European Youth Work Convention3 with youth mobility activities. Youth work is defned in the Council of the European Union’s Resolution on a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth feld (2010-2018) as: a broad term covering a large scope of activities of a social, cultural, educational or political nature both by, with and for young people. Increasingly, such activities also include sports and services for young people. Youth work belongs to the area of “out-of-school” education as well as specifc leisure time activities, managed by professional or voluntary youth workers and youth leaders and is based on non-formal learning processes and on voluntary participation.
The following questions are embedded in this discussion: how to validate and recognise the skills and competences acquired through non-formal learning, and how to assess the impact that mobility schemes have on young people’s personal development, as well as the added value of fostering civil society structures and democracy. It is not an easy exercise to provide answers to these questions, which is why co-operation with researchers and experts from practice and politics is crucial.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
To gain a better understanding and knowledge on the topic several events have been held in the past, among them the conference Framework, Quality, and Impact of Young Europeans’ Learning Mobility in May 2011 at the European Youth Centre of the Council of Europe in Budapest. It aimed at taking stock of current debates and research fndings on the learning mobility of young people, exchanging insights into quality factors and programme formats that contribute to the desirable impact of learning mobility schemes for young people, and identifying common interests, resources and interfaces as a basis for collaboration projects, studies and further exchanges within a European network of experts.4 The conference proved that despite the existence of a certain amount of research there is still a lack of knowledge and understanding. More efforts are needed to close this gap.
Another important result of the conference was the suggestion to implement a European Platform on Learning Mobility (EPLM) in the youth feld, as an actor independent of existing institutional actors. The aim of such a platform is to facilitate a sustainable exchange between policy makers, researchers, practitioners, institutions and organisations involved in the youth sector. The continuous co-operation of these parties is seen as providing added value to the further development, visibility and recognition of learning mobility in the youth feld. The platform is seen as an independent interdisciplinary network co-ordinated by a steering group in which researchers, policy makers and practitioners are working together in order to improve the quality of mobility and its effects on young people’s lives. The 1st European Platform conference in March 2013 in Berlin may be considered a milestone and a concrete result of this initiative. In this context, this book, titled Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts – Policies, approaches and examples and published as part of
3. See:http://youth-partnership-eu.coe.int/youthpartnership/documents/EKCYP/Youth_Policy/docs/Youth_ Work/Policy/declaration_1st_european_youthwork_convention.pdf, accessed 30 January 2013. 4. The papers of the conference are available at: www.forscher-praktiker-dialog.de/index/learning mobility2011/index.html, accessed 5 February 2013.
Günter J. Friesenhahn, Hanjo Schild, Hans-Georg Wicke, Judit Balogh
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
1 9
a series of youth knowledge books under the EU/Council of Europe youth partnership, aims at contributing to better knowledge and understanding of the subject. The structure of the book corresponds to different dimensions in the youth feld which are of fundamental importance.
In Section I, the authors will provide readers with an insight into historical developments, the political framework of youth mobility and achievements. Section II will draw on concepts and approaches concerning mobility and learning and shows, together with a European literature review on learning mobility, remarkable evidence concerning the high productivity of related research in this feld. To learn from others, to transfer knowledge, and to offer access to experiences, these are crucial elements in this context. Therefore, Section III refers to and offers good practice examples and project reports. All chapters are written by experts in the feld of youth mobility. The particular value of this book is that academics, researchers, political stakeholders, policy makers and practitioners have put together their knowledge and experience. The book intends to contribute to dialogue and co-operation among relevant players and to the discussion on the further development and purpose of youth mobility schemes in terms of outcomes for young people. Günter J. Friesenhahn – Research-Practice Dialogue/University of Applied Sciences Koblenz; Hanjo Schild – Partnership between the European Commission and the Council of Europe in the feld of youth, Strasbourg Hans-Georg Wicke – JUGEND für Europa, Deutsche Agentur für das EUProgramm JUGEND IN AKTION, Bonn Judit Balogh – Mobilitas, Budapest
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
December 2012
Introduction: learning mobility and non-formal learning
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
I
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Developments and political framework
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework D Introduction
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
T
he association between education and mobility is not a new phenomenon. Goethe, for instance, wrote in Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre: “die beste Bildung fndet ein gescheiter Mensch auf Reisen”5 (Goethe 1795/96). Moreover, journeyman years, in the form of Wanderjahre in Germany as well as the French Compagnonnage and its Tour de France, were popular practices among craftsmen especially in continental Europe from the late Middle Ages to the 19th century. Despite their disappearance with industrialisation, these practices represent an important root of the institutionalisation of youth in society. Considered thus they are similar to other mobility roles, such as mercenaries, migrant students or domestic workers who have left their home country to work abroad. All the examples mentioned are interesting because they relate not only to the upper classes, but provide a moratorium between childhood and adulthood also to young people from more rural or working class backgrounds. In the United States, migrant workers became a phenomenon in the 19th century after 5. “An intelligent person gets the best education while travelling.”
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
14
the civil war; they were mainly former soldiers looking for a temporary job. Social science research on homeless workers started in the US with Nels Anderson’s book on hobos, published by the University of Chicago Press in 1923. Raffaele Rauty notes that Anderson, a “paradoxical fgure of Chicago sociology” who was once himself a hobo, frightened the parents of students who took lectures with him (Rauty 1998).
After the Second World War, attitudes towards mobility changed. Mobility evolved from a marginal to a central moment in society, and became important for young people. Moreover, icons of mobility, such as the Vespa, the Solex or the 2CV became generational markers. Matter-of-fact means of transport gained an abstract signifcation, as they stood for youth freedom or even youth rebellion. With Jack Kerouac, “being on the road” became an expression of the so-called “beat generation” of the 1950s (Kerouac 1998). From then on being a novelist implied being an adventurous traveller. The road travelled became the equivalent of life itself: “Our battered suitcases were piled on the sidewalk again; we had longer ways to go. But no matter, the road is life.” (Kerouac 1998)
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
For philosophers and social scientists mobility expressed a new state of mind in a more open and fragmented world (e.g. Berg and Milmeister 2009). In parallel to this evolution in social thinking, mobility was rediscovered as a means of education. It was used notably in the context of new settings, transgressing the narrow objectives of formal education and promoting ideas such as European citizenship, intercultural understanding and peace. New international actors emerged, for instance the Franco-German Youth Offce created in the aftermath of the Elysée Treaty signed by Charles de Gaulle and Konrad Adenauer in 1963. The aims of the treaty were optimistically drawn from models of political rhetoric: “The aim of the Offce is to tighten the bonds between young people in both countries, to strengthen their mutual understanding and, to this effect, to provoke, encourage and, where necessary, to set up encounters and exchanges between young people” (DeutschFranzösisches Jugendwerk 2012). A similar example is the European Voluntary Service allowing young people to spend a period of 2 to 12 months as a volunteer in a foreign country. In both examples the educational aims are connected directly to political considerations. Today, learning mobility has become a frequent practice in the European youth feld and is supported by European organisations. Often it goes beyond formal education and constitutes a fertile ground where innovative and alternative learning experiences can thrive. International experiences are important in the life-course of young people growing up in a world with fewer boundaries and frontiers, with distances that are easier to overcome, and access to audio-visual information from all over the world as well as a higher rate of international contacts. Nevertheless, the lack of shared refection in and on learning mobility, which would be most helpful to an emerging educational area, represents an essential drawback. Classical disciplines such as psychology, sociology and educational science often do not gain access to the experiential realities of the youth feld and thus have diffculties in providing a conceptual framework on their own. Obviously an interdisciplinary approach based on exchanges among different groups of professionals and stakeholders such as researchers, practitioners, decision makers and representatives of international organisations would be a helpful option. This is the concern of the EPLM. The current text adopts a researcher’s perspective. It wants to contribute to a conceptual framework of learning mobility in Europe, helpful in programme planning, the evaluation and recognition of non-formal learning, as well as in the more general understanding of the role of
Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
2 15
learning mobility in young people’s lives. Furthermore the EPLM should be open, fexible and participatory, giving dialogue and bottom-up initiatives a chance. Three possible entries could be useful: a look into the European youth research landscape; a consideration of different conceptual backgrounds concerning both mobility and learning; and a look into innovative ways of producing evidence and developing knowledge, representing methodological and professional challenges for researchers eager to contribute to the EPLM.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D The European youth research landscape The research on European youth which should form the foundation for the work of the EPLM cannot be reduced to the different national youth research backgrounds put together. It has only a short history, which might be divided into three stages (e.g. Chisholm and Kovacheva 2002; Chisholm 2006a; 2006b). A frst formative period covers the period from 1970 to 1990. It is mainly dedicated to constructing a shared concept of European youth and even global youth. In the second stage (approximately 1990 to 2000), European youth research emerges as a relevant and visible feld of research and knowledge in Europe, recognised by the framework programmes of the European Union. It is essentially international, intercultural and interdisciplinary. In a third stage (after 2000) youth research is seen as an indispensable ingredient in a unique model of governance in the feld of European youth policy which bears the hallmark of being transversal, participatory and knowledgebased. A whole set of international structures support European youth research. As sociology has taken the lead in European youth research the two following scientifc networks play an important role: Research Committee 34 (Sociology of Youth) of the International Sociological Association (ISA) and Research Network 30 (Youth and Generation) of the European Sociological Association (ESA). As far as international organisations are concerned, the most important structures are the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP) and the Pool of European Youth Researchers (PEYR), both run by the partnership between the European Commission and the Council of Europe in the feld of youth. Milestones in the development of European youth research include: the report on youth research in the EU member states by Bergeret and Chisholm (1991); the IARD study (2001), comparing living conditions and expectations of young people as well as youth policy making in the EU member states; the White Paper “A new impetus for European Youth” (Commission of the European Communities, 2001), which explicitly emphasised the necessity of a greater understanding of youth as a key issue of European youth policy making. The national policy reviews of the Council of Europe (Williamson 2002; 2008), which represent a new genre of knowledge- and dialogue-based, policy-relevant writing, have been crucial instruments in the development of European youth research. Eurobarometers and European youth reports (e.g. Eurostat 2009) were added to the tool kit. A very important step was the development of the M.A. in European Youth Studies (M.A. EYS). The dominating discourse fgure of the emerging feld of European youth research became the “magic triangle” between policy, research and practice (see Milmeister and Williamson 2006). This means a defnite farewell to the superiority of academic knowledge and a belief in knowledge produced through exchanges among researchers, practitioners and decision makers.
Providing an understanding of changes in youth life cannot, obviously, be reduced to the sole issue of learning mobility. Today, only some of the following relevant topics are related to learning mobility: youth in an ageing society, youth in a knowledge society, young people confronted with globalisation (who are the winners, who the losers?), young people and digitalisation, access to literacy and academic skills in the context of urban super-diversity, gender and generational
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
16
relationships in liquid times, youth health and wellbeing, political participation and civic commitment, transition from education to employment, gaining access to autonomy and founding a family, as well as leisure activities and participation in culture. Furthermore, European youth research is also dedicated to a critical exploration of paradoxes and tensions (e.g. Coussée 2010). One of its important tasks consists in keeping a distance from the existing discourse and in creating a nurturing ground for the reformulation of youth policy, addressing for example participation v. disenfranchisement of young people, inclusion v. exclusion, and formal v. non-formal education. At stake is not just the confrmation of what exists, but also the consideration of discursive conficts and nuances in order to imagine alternatives to ongoing policies. European youth research aims at creating refective knowledge by studying the history of young people’s mobility, of youth work (see Verschelden et al. 2009) and of youth research, as well as of science-policyinteraction in the youth feld, for example by exploring good practice examples of scientifc policy advising (e.g. Berg and Weis 2009). The ultimate prospect is to establish a critical and mutual interrogation and cross-fertilisation of policy, practice and research. This contributes to youth policy development at different levels – European, regional, national and local – and also concerns sub-topics such as the recognition of non-formal education, criminal justice, school climate, health and learning mobility.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The whole domain is far from being stable, and does not have a cast shape. European youth research is on the move. Different tendencies can be identifed: the image of youth as life stage has evolved to youth as an object of public policies with European youth policy dynamically shaping national youth policy developments. Youth is no longer seen as a source of problems but as a positive resource on which society has to build its future. Following the Italian sociologist Alessandro Cavalli, youth is not regarded any more as a process but as a condition (Cavalli 1980). Young people are no longer considered as objects of educational actions, but as autonomous social actors constructing their learning and their active citizenship. The focus has gradually changed from national youth to youth in a globalised world, in which protest movements in the Arab world and generational changes in China (Lagrée 2009) affect the future of European societies. It has also become important to bridge the gap in prestige and methodology between research and evaluation. Thus, fundamental and applied research approaches appear as two sides of the same coin, without either of them being considered inferior to the other. This short and obviously subjective overview shows the richness which has developed in the European youth research landscape during the last few decades. European learning mobility research does not stand on its own. The important task will be to create links to existing European youth research and put the EPLM in context with questions on living conditions and youth policy making in Europe.
D Different conceptual backgrounds The previous section having considered the general background, we will now turn towards the conceptual foundations. In a frst step, the two key concepts, mobility and learning, will be briefy examined. Then, dichotomies which are important for a debate on European learning mobility will be identifed. Finally, the multi-sector and the multi-disciplinary nature of the refection on European learning mobility will be pointed out, showing that professional exchanges take place in a context of a larger scientifc and cultural discourse on mobility.
Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
2 17
Regarding mobility the EPLM should preferably use a broad defnition as a starting point. Buliung, Sultana and Faulkner give a good example of what could work in this context: Mobility = the ability of people or machines to move information, the body, and/or goods between physical, mobile, or cyberplaces (Buliung et al. 2012)
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The focus of social science research on mobility has been defnitely narrower, covering both research on children’s and young people’s transport opportunities from home to school and sociological research on young actors’ construction of mobility patterns, such as car-public transport-multimodality (e.g. Buliung et al. 2012; Milmeister and Roob 2010). Nevertheless, we should give innovative thinking a chance by including research on the use of space in children’s and young people’s lives such as shifts from outdoor to indoor activities, contemporary streetscapes and streets as homes (e.g. Berg et al. 2005). Also the discovery of the interval, time and space between the starting and the arriving point (Roulleau-Berger 1991; Berg and Milmeister 2009), may be a relevant consideration. Often social actors’ appropriation of locations and time slots related to transport re-creates them as lived-in and socially experienced spaces. Consequently, regarding the range of cultural and sociological studies on space and mobility, the EPLM debates on the one hand need a kind of sensitivity for this larger background, and, on the other hand, they will be dedicated to a more specialised area: learning mobility governance research and evaluation. Consequently, as a public debate they should not be confned to a purely instrumental approach. A brief look at the current research on learning (Leander et al. 2010) also opens up a broad horizon. Today learning is no longer understood as the result of knowledge transmission confned to a container-like classroom, dominated by a pre-established curriculum and an intransigent teacher-centredness (e.g. Coffeld 2000). Learning is more than mere transmission of knowledge; it is seen as growth in the sense of Jerome Bruner (1996) or even Paulo Freire (2005). Linking learning and mobility means crossing boundaries, such as those between school and out-of-school spaces, and those between curricular objectives and extracurricular individualised and localised aims. Education is no longer reduced to instruction but mainly means creating opportunities to learn. Learning is understood as situated learning, since it happens through participation in authentic activities (Lave and Wenger 1991). It is seen as an interactive and social process as opposed to a psychological process inside the individual. The opposition referred to can be articulated under different aspects, although a strict opposition only represents the extremes of a continuum. “Instructional places” are dominated more by one-answer questions, whereas in “learning spaces” questions referring to situative and individualised meanings prevail. Following a similar pattern, offcial academic careers contrast with subjective learning trajectories. Regarding outcomes, accountable disciplinary knowledge as required in a traditional instructional culture is opposed to learning networks relying on actor network theory. As far as learning mobility is concerned, the learning space can no longer be conceived as a confned container; it becomes a set of opportunities, corresponding to an open geography including varied spaces of learning and the paths in between. As the topic of learning mobility has to be seen against the complex background of the evolution of learning realities and the understanding of learning in liquid times, future debates will have to address a certain number of dichotomies. A distinction should be made between mobility for learning and learning through mobility; the frst term is purely instrumental, the second sees the fact of being mobile as
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
18
a transformative source of learning. It will also be important to keep in mind the opposition between independent and organised mobility, and to identify hybrid forms. A third dichotomy is linked to the contemporary media environment: it is the opposition between physical and virtual mobility. Without moving physically one’s references can be related to global social groups and networks. Furthermore, an important nuance lies in the aims of (learning) mobility: enhancing competitiveness or furthering European citizenship. In the frst case, the aim could be to increase employability through qualifcations acquired abroad and in that way learning mobility could be seen as an antecedent to employment mobility. In the second case, the aim is broader because mobility as an antecedent to open-mindedness, tolerance or intercultural understanding is supposed to change a young person’s personality. Finally, higher education mobility can be seen as the current practice of student mobility between existing structures, for example the Erasmus Programme, or as a new design for higher education courses, for example in the shape of the international virtual faculty in M.A. EYS, creating an innovative academic learning space in the area of European higher education. The dichotomies mentioned above make obvious the multi-sector and multi-type character of learning mobility in Europe. Learning mobility covers a wide range of felds: the educational exchange of students under the Erasmus Programme related to the internationalisation and globalisation of education and higher education in particular; international language courses; individual or collective travelling and tourism which can be seen as instances of informal learning; the youth feld sector with initiatives such as the voluntary service, international non-formal learning, Youth in Action projects, and fnally, youth feld-related transversal aspects of learning mobility.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Since “learning mobility” is a research topic for many disciplines, the debates of the EPLM should be nourished by diverse multi-disciplinary inputs. They could come from social and human geography, from social and cultural studies/history, from architecture and urbanism as well as from political, social and educational sciences. They could include types of literature normally outside mainstream educational research, such as novels, philosophy or architecture. Karin Priem (2012) for instance has used a contemporary novel by Hanns-Josef Ortheil (2011) to elucidate the ways of learning in post-war Germany. As in fction mobility often appears as a metaphor for growing up; the discourse on learning mobility appears in no way to be a privilege of social and educational sciences, for it belongs to the everyday and also to cultural semantics. Similarly, mobility realities are doubled by mobility myths in the media, and reality is infuenced both by experiential and imaginative factors. An illustration might be given by referring to movies in which mobility plays a major role. Very often mobility gives access to freedom and autonomy, is linked to identity stress, personality quest, intercultural misunderstandings as well as learning. Nicholas Ray’s Rebel Without a Cause (1955), with James Dean, would probably not have produced a time-resistant icon of youth protest without the 1949 Mercury. What would Easy Rider (1969) by Dennis Hopper be without the Harley-Davidson bikes, John Landis’ The Blues Brothers (1980) without the Dodge Monaco or Ridley Scott’s Thelma and Louise (1991) without the blue Ford Thunderbird? In Taxi Driver (1976) and Bringing out the Dead (1999) Martin Scorsese has demonstrated how urban mobility can constitute a visual language. Cédric Klapisch’s L’auberge espagnole6 (2002) has as a topic the experiences of Erasmus students from all over Europe 6. Thanks to Ézgehan S¸enyuva, Ankara, for drawing our attention to this movie.
Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
2 19
in Barcelona. Sofa Coppola’s Lost in Translation (2003) shows subjective vulnerability resulting from an intercultural gap between Japan and the Western world. The semantic universe of mobility myths, made up of typical elements such as cars, motorbikes, foreign countries, leaving home, losing oneself, the road and encounters with other people, can fulfl diverse functions: be it allegory, metaphor or metonymy. It clearly indicates social knowledge and imagination, which function as a foundation of mobility policies, generate motivations, and are in turn fuelled by changing mobility experiences.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The debate on learning mobility is not homogeneous. Firstly, the political discourse shows a tendency towards different dynamics and secondly, the scientifc discourse in itself can be contradictory. Moreover, political as well as scientifc views may not match young people’s life experiences. Political arguments are based on diverse felds. A frst approach consists in extending Erasmus, the so-called fagship of European higher education policy, beyond the confnes of universities, and developing a similar scheme for secondary schools or people in vocational training. Sometimes the higher education area also goes beyond Erasmus by integrating mobility patterns into innovative higher education offers, bridging higher education and non-formal learning, and using encounters with cultural otherness as an academic learning source. In addition to the higher education mobility policies, a further pattern, related to the European youth sector, consists in learning from the history of youth exchanges and their long European or bilateral tradition with a focus on intercultural understanding, human rights and European citizenship.
Within the scientifc discourse there is on the one hand a tendency to celebrate mobility as the mark of a new time, a new social space and a new society. This started with the Chicago school with Ernest Burgess and Robert E. Park investigating the relationship between “mentality” and “locomotion” (Park and Burgess 1925) in a modern urban context. It continues today with Saskia Sassen’s “global city” (2001) showing how New York, Tokyo and London turn into command centres in a globalised economy, Arjun Appadurai’s “cultural fows” (2005), Zygmunt Bauman’s “liquid times” (2010) and Manuel Castells’ “network society” (2010). But they include more factual analyses as well, such as Iain Borden’s study of the city space in the eyes of skateboarders (2006). On the other hand, social sciences also provide an impassive analysis of empirical data. In this context, the discursive euphoria just mentioned disappears. There are different types of young people and inequalities exist among them. Some of them are excluded because they belong to a mobility hostile environment. Access to mobility is socially differentiated. Interval spaces exist, but they are often perceived differently by social scientists and in the discourse of young people themselves. There are multiple perspectives on learning mobility, depending on whether it is considered by adults, experts or young people (see Berg and Milmeister 2009). The contextualised mobility experiences of young people may be different from theoretical discourses on mobility. Political thinking can produce a structuring of mobility governance which corresponds to divisions imported from the political arena. The mobility policy of higher education students, for instance, is separated from the policy in the youth feld, although both are at least strongly related if not intermingled in the reality of a young person’s life. Very often, a common underlying competence exists, linking the notions of “learning to learn” and “learning to participate” (Hoskins and Crick 2010), which is affected by mobility, but which through the political lens is not valued by decision makers. All these tensions correspond to semantic splits in highly differentiated societies: splits between the
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
20
political discourse and the material world, between formal systems and real life, and between the managerial and the functional view.
D Methodological and professional challenges for researchers The third and last entry for the work of the EPLM concerns ways of producing evidence, ways of developing knowledge. Researchers will have to face ambitious challenges if they want to contribute to the building up of the platform. These matters go far beyond the scope of the present contribution; nevertheless, a few hints will be given in order to indicate some of the methodological and professional challenges for researchers and at least refer to the added value contemporary social science could bring to a politico-practical debate. The EPLM takes place in a context of innovation in social science research methods (Williams and Vogt 2011). It is advisable to combine quantitative and qualitative analyses as well as to promote mixed method approaches (Creswell and Plano Clark 2011). An important challenge will be to link structural (macro-level) and actor related (micro-level) inquiries, especially since practitioners expect to go beyond the mere juxtaposition of structure and agency in order to answer their questions. Young people should not only be talked about but be given a voice to express themselves while realistically considering their localised contexts. Ideally researchers do not only evoke inter-disciplinarity and inter-professionalism in their discourses, but apply them in their exchanges and their work on European learning mobility. This will help to qualify them both in inter-culturally sensitive and comparative analysis as well as in policy-science-practice interactions. A quality criterion for work will be to fnd a balance between political/practical relevance and research integrity. Evaluation, especially formative and participatory types of evaluation, ought to become part of the agenda. Applied research based on solid general foundations and rooted in European youth research should be produced. The fostering of critical and close scrutiny as well as the development of innovative conceptual grounds, using concepts such as hybridity (Nilan and Feixa 2006) or transformative and post-linearist sociology (e.g. Machado Pais 2003; Leccardi and Ruspini 2008) are of high importance.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Conclusion The present contribution is not an EPLM theory manifesto. With the current state of affairs this would probably be neither possible nor even desirable. So the text gives an overview of three possible entries for the work of the EPLM: a brief sketch of the European research landscape, a partial and subjective exploration of the conceptual backgrounds as well as a brief refection on methodological challenges. Learning mobility – playing a role in a changed context of growing up and requiring innovative forms of educational governance – is a complex phenomenon which can only be refected in the light of a multiple hermeneutics. This refers to a specifc role of social science, which is qualitative and multi-grounded, participatory and democratic. It is more issue- than discipline-oriented; it plays its major role outside the ivory tower, sharing knowledge and responsibility with other professionals. Hopefully, these remarks will be a motivating and stimulating overture to the platform’s future debates.
Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
2 21
D References Anderson N. (1998), On hobos and homelessness, Rafaele Rauty (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Appadurai A. (ed.) (2005), Globalization, Duke University Press, Durham.
Bauman Z. (2010), Liquid times: Living in an age of uncertainty, Polity Press, Cambridge. Berg C. and Milmeister M. (2009), “Mobilität und Sozialisation”, Berg C. et al. (eds) (2009), Savoirs et engagements. Hommage à Georges Wirtgen, Differdange, Editions PHI, University of Luxembourg, pp. 259-270 (ScientiPHIc, Vol. 5; Monographies de la recherche jeunesse, Vol. 4).
Berg C. and Weis C. (2009), Advising language education policy making in Luxembourg: Results from a refective case study on the scientist’s interaction with politics, Poster and presentation at the European Science Foundation Conference “Science and values: the politicisation of science”, Bielefeld, 25-30 May 2009. Berg C. et al. (eds) (2009), Savoirs et engagements: Hommage à Georges Wirtgen, Differdange, Editions PHI, University of Luxembourg (ScientiPHIc, Vol. 5; Monographies de la recherche jeunesse, Vol. 4). Berg C., Milmeister M. and Schoos J. (2005), Stadtraum - Jugendraum? Vom professionellen Diskurs über Gefährdete zu multimodalen Hilfestellungen in einer vernetzten Jugendsozialarbeit, Esch/Alzette, Editions PHI, Centre d’études sur la situation des jeunes en Europe (CESIJE), University of Luxembourg (ScientiPHIc, Vol. 1; Schriften zur Jugendforschung, Vol. 1).
Bergeret J.-M. and Chisholm L. (1991), Young people in the European Community. Towards an agenda for research and policy, Report for the Commission of the European Communities Task Force Human Resources, Education, Training and Youth, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels. Borden I. (2006), Skateboarding, space and the city: Architecture and the body, Berg Publishers, Oxford.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Bruner J. (1996), The culture of education, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA and London. Buliung R., Sultana S. and Faulkner G. (2012), “Special section on child and youth mobility – Current research and nascent themes”, Journal of Transport Geography, 20 (1), pp. 31-3. Castells M. (2010), The rise of the network society (2nd edition), Blackwell, Malden, Mass.
Cavalli A. (1980), “La gioventù: Condizione o processo?”, Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia, 4, pp. 519-42. Chisholm L. and Kovacheva S. (2002), Exploring the European youth mosaic. The social situation of young people in Europe, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg.
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
22
Chisholm L. (2006a), “European youth research: Development, debates, demands”, Bois-Reymond M. (du) and Chisholm L. (eds) (2006), The modernisation of youth transitions in Europe, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 11-21.
Chisholm L. (2006b), “Youth research and the youth sector in Europe: Perspectives, partnerships and promise”, Milmeister M. and Williamson H. (eds) (2006), Dialogues and networks. Organising exchanges between youth feld actors, Esch/Alzette: Editions PHI, Centre d’études sur la situation des jeunes en Europe (CESIJE), University of Luxembourg, pp. 23-39. Coffeld F. (2000), The necessity of informal learning, The learning society No. 4, The Policy Press, Bristol. Commission of the European Communities (2001), European Commission White Paper. A new impetus for European youth, COM (2001) 681 fnal, 21-11-2001, European Commission, Brussels. Coussée F. (2010), “Youth work, a social practice!”, Coyote, 16, pp. 32-4. Creswell J. W. and Plano Clark V.L. (2011), Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd edition), Sage, Los Angeles.
Deutsch-Französisches Jugendwerk (DFJW) [The Franco-German Youth Offce] (2012), The Franco-German Youth Offce (FGYO): Dates and key statistics, available at www.dfjw.org, accessed 14 August 2012. Eurostat (2009), Youth in Europe: A statistical portrait. Statistical books, Publications Offce of the European Union, Luxembourg. Freire P. (2005), Education for critical consciousness, Continuum, London and New York.
Goethe J. W. (von) (1795/96), “Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre”, Goethe J. W. (von) (1981), Werke, Volume 7, Beck, Munich, pp. 9-610.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Hoskins B. and Crick R. D. (2010), “Competences for learning to learn and active citizenship: Different currencies or two sides of the same coin?”, European Journal of Education, 45(1), pp. 121-37. IARD (2001), Study on the state of young people and youth policy in Europe. Report for the European Commission DG for Education and Culture, Contract No. 1999-1734/001-001.
Kerouac J. ([1957]1998), On the road, Penguin Books, London. Lagrée J.-Ch. (2009), “Chinese youth. What change?”, Berg C. et al. (eds) (2009), Savoirs et engagements. Hommage à Georges Wirtgen. Differdange, Editions PHI, University of Luxembourg, pp. 244-58. (ScientiPHIc, Vol. 5; Monographies de la recherche jeunesse, Vol. 4). Lave J. and Wenger E. (1991), Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York.
Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
2 23
Leander K. M., Philipps N. C. and Headrick Taylor K. (2010), “The changing social spaces of learning: Mapping new mobilities”, Review of Research in Education, 34(1), pp. 329-94. Leccardi C. and Ruspini E. (eds) (2008), A new youth? Young people, generations and family life, Ashgate, Aldershot. Machado Pais J. (2003), “The multiple faces of the future in the labyrinth of life”, Journal of Youth Studies, 6(2), pp. 115-26.
Milmeister M. and Williamson H. (eds) (2006), Dialogues and networks. Organising exchanges between youth feld actors, Esch/Alzette, Editions PHI, Centre d’études sur la situation des jeunes en Europe (CESIJE), University of Luxembourg (ScientiPHIc, Vol. 3; Youth research monographs, Vol. 2). Milmeister P. and Roob C. (2010), Das Verhältnis junger Menschen in Luxemburg zum öffentlichen Nahverkehr: Über die Bedeutung des ÖPNV im Alltag und die Hintergründe von Mobilitätsverhalte, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg (INSIDE-Contexts and Structures of Growing Up). Nilan P. and Feixa C. (2006), Global youth? Hybrid identities, plural worlds, Routledge, London.
Ortheil H.-J. (2011), Die Erfndung des Lebens, btb, München. Park R. E. and Burgess E. W. ([1925] 1984), The city. Suggestions for investigation of human behavior in the urban environment, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Priem K. (2012), “Sehen, Lesen, Schreiben, Sprechen und die Dinge. Eine Didaktik der ‘Stunde Null’”, Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 58 (Beiheft), pp. 124-35.
Rauty R. (1998), “Introduction: Nels Anderson 1889-1986”, Anderson N. (1998), On hobos and homelessness, Rauty R. (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 1-17.
Roulleau-Berger L. (1991), La ville intervalle: Jeunes entre centre et banlieue, Méridiens Klincksieck, Paris.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Sassen S. (2001), The global city: New York, London, Tokyo, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Verschelden G. et al. (eds) (2009), The history of youth work in Europe and the relevance for youth policy today, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. Williams M. and Vogt W. P. (2011), The Sage handbook of innovation in social research methods, Sage, Los Angeles. Williamson H. (2002), Supporting young people in Europe: Principles, policy and practice. The Council of Europe international reviews of national youth policy 1997-2001. A synthesis report, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. Williamson H. (2008), Supporting young people in Europe. Volume 2. Lessons from the ‘second seven’ Council of Europe international reviews of national youth policy, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg.
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Pascal Lejeune
European Union support to learning mobility: rationale of a success
ÒE
urope will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan. It will be built through concrete achievements which frst create a de facto solidarity”, stated the Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950. The concrete achievements of the European project are many. Not all of them are immediately perceived as positive outcomes of the European Union, while mobility schemes like Erasmus or the European Voluntary Service are overwhelmingly considered “success stories”.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Education and youth as part of the European project It was not an obvious matter to introduce the felds of education and youth within the competences of the European Economic Community. From the mid-1980s onwards, however, various steps were taken, aiming at revitalising European integration among Community member states. The Spinelli draft European Union treaty, adopted by the European Parliament in 1984, foresaw a chapter on “policy for society”, including education. The 1985 Adonnino report A People’s Europe, endorsed by the Milan European Council, suggested that greater effort should be made with regard to co-operation and mobility
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
26
among universities and proposed voluntary work for young people and exchanges among schools. One must also mention the 1989 Commission medium-term priority strategies for education in the context of the implementation of the Single European Act (which came into force in 1987) and its main objectives, namely the completion of the internal market by the end of 1992 and the economic and social cohesion of the Community: free movement of persons and recognition of qualifcations for vocational and academic purposes; initial and continuing vocational training; development of higher education; adapting to technological change; improving the quality of education systems; language teaching; and youth exchanges. These and other initiatives paved the way for the inclusion in the Maastricht Treaty (1992) of a specifc article on education and youth. While fully respecting the diversity of national situations and the principle of subsidiarity, the new Treaty provided that Community action should be aimed at promoting co-operation in education and at “encouraging the development of youth exchanges and of exchanges of socio-educational instructors”.
In the meantime, following the example of Community programmes to promote research and technological development such as ESPRIT, the frst spending programmes were adopted in the feld of education, training and youth, notably Comett (1986), Erasmus (1987) and Youth for Europe (1988): In a similar fashion to the major RDT programmes, [they] provide practical demonstrations to the public of the meaning of the Community dimensions and the value of joint efforts. They also have an important multiplier effect on the free movement of ideas and people and in increasing a sense of partnership in shared endeavours. Through the opportunities they offer for young people to meet and to learn from each other, they serve to enhance mutual understanding of cultural differences and also to counteract xenophobia by giving young people a window on the wider world (European Commission 1989)
The purpose of these programmes was clearly twofold: economic (providing the necessary human resources to ensure that the potential of the internal market was exploited to the full) and sociocultural (bringing Europe closer to its citizens and giving the Community the human face it lacked):
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
With the adoption of the Single European Act, the priority objectives became the completion of the internal market and the free movement of persons, goods, capital and services. The question of the mobility of students and teachers became more important, particularly in a context in which discussions within the Community had brought to the fore the question of developing a citizens’ Europe (European Commission 2006)
The Youth for Europe Programme, proposed by the Commission in 1986, aimed at allowing young people to meet, develop joint transnational, cultural, social or other projects and thereby develop a sense of European awareness and solidarity.
D Programmes supporting transnational mobility came frst From these early years till today, and whatever the sector concerned (formal learning and training or non-formal learning in the youth feld), learning mobility has been an essential component of European co-operation in the felds of education/training and youth. It has steadily developed through successive programmes (including the current Lifelong Learning and Youth in Action programmes7). 7. On the Youth in Action Programme (including the European Voluntary Service), see: http://ec.europa. eu/youth/index_en.htm, accessed 31 January 2013.
Pascal Lejeune
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
3 27
Mobility is part of the fexibility considered important for the European labour force. Learning mobility, that is transnational mobility for the purpose of acquiring new skills, is one of the fundamental ways through which individuals, particularly young people, can strengthen their future employability as well as their personal development (European Commission 2009). Transnational non-formal learning experiences, such as participation in a crosscultural youth exchange or in the European Voluntary Service, have long-lasting effects on the participants. They can also act as an “eye-opener” to help young people identify new perspectives or better orient their career goals. Studies indicate that participation in voluntary service schemes reduces career indecision.
Foreign-language skills are among the major benefts of transnational learning mobility, and non-formal learning settings can strongly contribute to their development: the full immersion in another language context, even for short periods of time, allows for daily exposure to the target language and practice of communication in real situations. Active use of languages in interaction with peers across boundaries enhances intercultural competence. Even short-term exposure to another language can increase the chance that one will continue learning the language afterwards. Moreover, it becomes more likely that someone will go abroad for a longer period in the future. Experiences abroad also offer an opportunity to open up to the world, and success in such experiences is often a factor that strengthens self-confdence.
Mobility can also help foster a deeper sense of European identity and citizenship among young people. Transnational friendships and freedom of movement across the continent construct a more positive attitude among young people towards the EU and its institutions.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Youth exposure to cultural diversity does not only beneft the individuals directly involved but also the communities concerned, as well as families and peers. It helps spread a culture of openness, solidarity and tolerance which has an impact beyond the individual participants directly involved.
This is valid both within and beyond EU borders. International exchanges and youth work activities involving young people from third countries contribute to enhancing intercultural learning, combating prejudices and promoting solidarity and mutual understanding across EU borders as well. By adding a more “human face” to international relations, the development of people-to-people contacts leads to better and stronger relations between the EU and its partner countries and also builds a stronger image of the EU globally. Beyond the direct support to young people’s mobility, encouraging youth workers’ transnational mobility and training contributes to increasing and improving their capacity to help young people in a more professional way. Fostering co-operation and the exchange of youth work practices contributes to improving methods, developing innovation and quality in non-formal learning and youth work, which in turn can lead to better recognition of non-formal learning outcomes and of youth work.8
8. On the rationale of EU support to activities in favour of youth and in particular to youth mobility, see also Impact assessment on youth actions, accompanying the Commission proposal for Erasmus for All, COM(2011) 788 fnal (European Commission 2011a).
European Union support to learning mobility: rationale of a success
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
28
D A domain where the Union makes a difference Keeping in mind subsidiarity as a guiding principle of any European initiative in this sector, it is worth noting that learning mobility is also among the most obvious activities where direct intervention by the European Union offers true added value and can make a difference. Against the fragmented and uneven provision of opportunities across member states, only an EU programme can ensure an equal basis of possibilities for transnational mobility, notably in those countries where such opportunities do not exist. Transnational mobility is also more effectively organised at EU level: an EU-wide network of national agencies handling mobility (not limited to bilateral exchanges between two given countries) generates economies of scale by avoiding replication of similar schemes and institutions in all member states.
The existence of EU-wide instruments ensures the consistent quality of the mobility as well as the recognition of its benefts (e.g. the accreditation of structures participating in the European Voluntary Service or the development of Youthpass). The Youth in Action Programme provides an important contribution to the quality of youth work at all levels: It is a “carrier” of a wide European experience on recognition of non-formal learning and the prospects are encouraging for becoming a factor of greater infuence in the near future for national policies regarding lifelong learning (Christodoulidis 2010)
EU intervention broadens the scope of opportunities that are available, by bringing European themes to the attention of young people, which would not necessarily be tackled in similar activities organised at national or local level. It complements national initiatives concerned with young people’s civic engagement and non-formal learning. It also ensures visibility and credibility to the commitment of the European Union vis-à-vis young people and translates at European level the new objective introduced by the Lisbon Treaty (2010), according to which Union action shall be aimed at “encouraging the participation of young people in democratic life in Europe”.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
An EU-wide tool to support youth mobility can achieve strong systemic impact by acting as a laboratory enabling the testing of new approaches, which can inspire national/regional schemes or help them develop a transnational/European dimension. Noticeable leverage effect has been achieved in some countries (e.g. Greece and Italy) and regions (e.g. Ile de France) where additional funds have been allocated to complement the support to transnational youth projects funded under Youth in Action. The activities supported by this programme offer convincing examples of the effectiveness of non-formal learning mobility. Ninety-one percent of young people consider that having participated in a Youth in Action project has increased their competences in a foreign language; 75% said they were in a better position to identify opportunities for their personal or professional future; 73% declared they felt more European. These are only some outcomes of a programme which will beneft in 2013 from a budget of more than 200 million euros, making it possible to reach more than 200 000 participants, a majority of them taking part in mobility projects.
D Beyond the programmes: policy developments Beyond their intrinsic value, EU programmes in education/training and in the youth feld are also important tools to support the implementation of the Open
Pascal Lejeune
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
3 29
Method of Coordination developed in these sectors. They foster progress towards the common objectives agreed upon, promoting exchange of knowledge and good practices as well as peer learning among national policy makers and practitioners, supporting the involvement of the civil society; in addition to bringing together participants from different countries, they ensure compliance with EU objectives, priorities and policy goals. In particular, the European education, training and youth programmes implemented since the mid-1980s support and add credibility to the political processes which have developed over time with a view to fostering transnational learning mobility. In higher education, an obvious link exists between Erasmus and the Bologna process. In the youth feld, the positive experience of the European Voluntary Service since 1996 led to the adoption of the 2008 Council of the European Union Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union (Council of the EU 2008), which encourages the member states to give more young people the opportunity to volunteer in another country.
D And now? The most recent EU initiatives for youth put a strong emphasis on learning mobility. In the framework of the Europe 2020 Strategy, the Youth on the Move fagship initiative (2010) underlines that: smart and inclusive growth depends on actions throughout the lifelong learning system, to develop key competences and quality learning outcomes, in line with labour market needs. Europe needs to extend and broaden learning opportunities for young people as a whole, including supporting the acquisition of skills through non-formal educational activities
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
This vision, endorsed by the Council of the EU in 2011, stresses the importance of promoting learning mobility as a way for young people to strengthen their future employability and acquire new professional competences, while enhancing their development as active citizens. This builds on the recommendations of the High Level Expert Forum on Mobility (European Commission 2008), according to which learning mobility should become a natural feature of being European and an opportunity provided to all young people in Europe through all forms of education, including non-formal education. In the framework of the Youth Opportunities Initiative (2012) the Commission proposed, among various measures, to help unemployed young people, increased support to learning mobility through Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci and the European Voluntary Service.
Moreover, learning mobility will remain a key action of the new Erasmus for All programme proposed by the European Commission for the period 2014-20. Like the current programmes, Erasmus for All will support activities aimed at furthering co-operation for innovation and good practices and at encouraging policy reform, but the bulk of the budget will be devoted to learning mobility, be it in formal or non-formal settings. This new setup frames the development of non-formal learning mobility for the years to come. Never has the political impetus or fnancial support from the European Union been stronger. But important challenges remain to be tackled if we really want learning mobility to become the rule rather than the exception.
European Union support to learning mobility: rationale of a success
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
30
The frst obvious challenge relates to the capacity to mobilise public and private actors operating at local, national and regional levels to increase mobility opportunities. The European programme, however important its budget is, can only offer a partial response to rising demand. Part of the justifcation of the intervention of the Union in this feld stems from the “show window” function of a programme like Youth in Action, which can inspire national or regional schemes to broaden their remit to transnational mobility. The many actors (youth workers, youth organisations, national agencies, etc.) involved over the years in the mobility programmes supported by the Union can act as multipliers and contribute, through a reinforced dissemination of the results of the projects, to mobilising new partners. Some modalities of the support to mobility by the European programme may also be revisited with this objective in mind. Another important challenge concerns the capacity to be inclusive and able to reach out and involve young people with fewer opportunities, not only those who are better off and more naturally open to a learning experience abroad. This is of particular relevance when it comes to non-formal learning, which is sometimes experienced as being offered a second chance. The fexible and informal methods used in youth work practice help youth workers reach out to young people more effectively and develop trusting and qualitatively different relationships compared to the more formal and structured ones developed in schools or the workplace. Youth workers help to provide alternative routes to training, qualifcations and employment to those conventionally provided within education. In addition, they can also act to open up opportunities in the mainstream education sector. This has been confrmed by the Youth in Action interim evaluation, which acknowledged the role of the programme as a stimulus to motivate young people to study (Ernst & Young 2010; Little 2010), as well as by various surveys on young participants and youth leaders: over 80% of Youth in Action participants planned to engage in further education opportunities after participation in the programme (European Commission 2011b). In times of unprecedented economic crisis, with young people affected so severely, this dimension is particularly important.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Conclusion In 2013, we celebrate the 25th anniversary of the adoption of the frst European programme in the youth feld. From the entry into force of Youth for Europe until the completion of Youth in Action, 2.5 million young people or youth workers will have taken part in youth projects supported by the European Union, notably for non-formal learning mobility purposes. This impressive quantitative result as well as the increasing number of applications which are unsuccessful due to budgetary limitations underline the expectations of European citizens vis-à-vis such mobility opportunities. Behind these statistics are individual stories of Europeans whose lives have been enriched by invaluable personal experiences such as spending several months volunteering in another country, travelling abroad, maybe for the frst time, to meet youngsters from other origins, or exchanging professional experiences with youth workers from other backgrounds. Today, this is also what Europe is about! Non-formal learning mobility has contributed a lot to shaping this vision of a European Union which cares about its youth, a mission which should not be underestimated. In times of economic crisis and of a tendency to turn inwards there is a need to do more in this feld, because what is at stake is not only increasing the skills and competences of young people but also enhancing their participation in society and
Pascal Lejeune
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
3 31
their feeling of being European. In other words, making a reality of Jean Monnet’s vision: “We are not seeking a coalition of states, we are uniting people”.
D References Christodoulidis S. (2010), Interim Evaluation of the Youth in Action Programme in Greece.
Council of the European Union (2008), Council Recommendation of 20 November 2008 on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union, OJEU C319 of 13.12.2008, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri =OJ:C:2008:319:0008:0010:EN:PDF, accessed 29 November 2012. Council of the European Union (2011), Council Recommendation of 28 June 2011 on “Youth on the move” – promoting the learning mobility of young people, OJEU C199 of 7.7.2011, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=OJ:C:2011:199:0001:0005:en:PDF, accessed 29 November 2012. Ernst and Young (2010), Interim evaluation of the Youth in Action Programme in the Netherlands.
European Commission (1989), Education and training in the European Community. Guidelines for the medium term: 1989-1992, Communication from the Commission to the Council. Commission of the European Communities, Document COM (89) 236 fnal, Brussels. European Commission (2006), The history of European co-operation in education and training – Europe in the making – An example, available at http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/ documents/publications/history_en.pdf, accessed 29 November 2012.
European Commission (2008), Report of the High Level Expert Forum on Mobility. Making learning mobility an opportunity for all, available at http://ec.europa.eu/ education/doc/2008/mobilityreport_en.pdf, accessed 29 November 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
European Commission (2009), Green Paper “Promoting the learning mobility of young people”, COM(2009) 329 fnal. European Commission (2011a), Impact assessment on youth actions, Commission Staff Working Paper accompanying the document Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a single education, training, youth and sport programme for the period 2014-2020, COM(2011) 788 fnal, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/erasmus-for-all/doc/impact2_en.pdf, accessed 29 November 2012.
European Commission (2011b), Impact of the Youth in Action Programme. 2011 Monitoring Survey, available at http://ec.europa.eu/youth/focus/doc/monitoring_ survey/main_results_monitoring_survey_2011.pdf, accessed 29 November 2012.
Little, Arthur D. (2010), Interim evaluation of the Youth in Action Programme in Sweden.
Schuman Declaration (1950), available at http://europa.eu/about-eu/basicinformation/symbols/europe-day/schuman-declaration/index_en.htm, accessed 29 November 2012.
European Union support to learning mobility: rationale of a success
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
David Garrahy
Advocating for youth: the European Youth Forum helping to increase recognition of mobility and non-formal learning D Introduction
T
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
he European Youth Forum (the “Youth Forum”) is a key stakeholder in the European education and mobility debate, representing youth organisations as providers of non-formal education (NFE) and often mobility. Education is one of the Youth Forum’s fve strategic priorities. Mobility is part of the Youth Forum Work Plan – especially seeking to increase mobility for young people and for volunteers. Mobility, for the Youth Forum, is at the core of the European dream. In the 2007 Youth Forum Resolution “Europe is our Home – No visas”, it was set out that mobility is the freedom to move from one European country to another and to experience cultural difference while feeling a sense of unity with other Europeans. The Youth Forum role is to advocate for measures to be taken against the various barriers that impede mobility, including visa requirements. The European Youth Forum supports the improvement of learning mobility, the removal of visa barriers and the mobility of all young people generally. For many young people, a mobility experience also includes an education and learning experience. The Youth Forum
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
34
sees education as a process aimed at providing young people with the opportunity to gain the necessary competences for personal development, citizenship and access to quality employment. In the move towards a knowledge-based society, it is essential for everyone to learn and build competences on a lifelong and “life-wide” path. To achieve this aim, the further development of recognition instruments, together with opportunities for learning mobility of young people, is crucial.
D Mobility The Youth Forum’s Work Plan for the period 2011-12 mandates the platform to work on increasing learning mobility opportunities, the removal of visa barriers and the mobility of all young people generally. The Youth Forum advocates for an end to the visa requirement for young people participating in youth activities within Council of Europe member states. The Youth Forum participates in many advocacy activities to implement these Work Plan commitments. These include participation in the European Commission’s Expert Group on the Youth on the Move card – which seeks to give incentives for young people to be mobile across the EU’s borders. The Youth Forum’s priorities include ensuring that the card encourages the active citizenship elements of mobility, learning through involvement in the country where the young person has moved.
The Youth Forum is part of the Steering Group of the European Platform on Learning Mobility and continues to contribute its knowledge and experience in non-formal education and learning mobility to this exciting collaboration. The Youth Forum will continue to encourage the involvement of young people in the foundation of the Platform in March 2013, so that young people themselves will be involved in the debate. The Youth Forum also believes that the visa process across Europe is unnecessarily long, expensive, bureaucratic and often upsetting for the people who need visas. The European Parliament and Council “Visa Directive” of 2004 (2004/38/EC), while a step forward in terms of mobility by recognising the category of “volunteer” for the granting of visas, still does not go far enough. The Youth Forum, in its response to the consultation on the revision of this directive, advocated for easier mobility for volunteers and other young people, especially in including the right of residence in the defnition of the visa.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Non-formal education For the Youth Forum, the learning gained through a mobility experience needs to be further recognised and acknowledged, in order to encourage more mobility experiences. Recognition of non-formal education (NFE) and the learning outcomes of organisation-based volunteering is a precondition to develop a true lifelong learning reality in Europe. This recognition is refected in the Youth Forum Work Plan for 2011-12 where the Youth Forum pledges to “work towards recognition of non-formal education and learning outcomes of organisation-based volunteering, as well as lifelong and life-wide learning opportunities”. Recognition is to be sought at individual, social and political levels, equally. The Youth Forum seeks to increase this recognition in many ways, for example through the Youth Forum’s NFE week, held each autumn, which seeks to increase understanding of NFE and discuss how to increase its recognition by bringing together
David Garrahy
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
4 35
stakeholders, politicians and NFE providers. The European Youth Forum has also responded to calls for quality and certifcation demands for NFE by taking the lead to set up a quality assurance framework.
D Recognition Through its Policy Paper on recognition of Non-Formal Education: confrming the real competencies of young people in the knowledge society (European Youth Forum 2005) and its Policy Paper on Non-Formal Education: A framework for indicating and assuring quality (European Youth Forum 2008a), the Youth Forum has sought to contribute to the political recognition of NFE and has advocated for it in various processes at European level. Further, as a contribution to generating further knowledge and understanding on the contribution of NFE to the holistic development of young people, in 2008 the Youth Forum published The Sunshine Report on Non-Formal Education (European Youth Forum 2008b), compiling best practices in NFE from Youth Forum member organisations. The Youth Forum has also contributed to the revised Pathways 2.0 Paper,9 regarded as a solid basis for future action of the European Commission and the Council of Europe in the feld of NFE. The Youth Forum will continue working towards implementation of the 10 elements for the renewed strategy as set up in the Pathways Paper 2.0. Also the Youth Forum has been successfully advocating for NFE recognition through the various European instruments for recording of competences, such as Youthpass and the European Skills Passport. The Forum has also closely followed the new strategic framework for European co-operation in the feld of education and training (“ET 2020”). In this process, particular attention has been paid to gaining political recognition of NFE and its learning outcomes, and connecting it with other lifelong learning felds and with the development of recognition instruments.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The Youth Forum has also been a member of the Expert Group on the recognition of NFE and youth work since it frst met in January 2011. Through its participation in the group, the Youth Forum joins efforts with other key stakeholders for stronger advocacy before EU and Council of Europe institutions and co-operation in the implementation of its policies on the recognition of the role of youth organisations in NFE. The Expert Group is following up on the outcomes of the Symposium on Recognition of Youth work and Non-Formal Learning held in November 2011 in Strasbourg. Current priorities for the work of the expert group include setting up a political process for NFE (the proposed “Strasbourg process”). The Youth Forum has welcomed, as a step forward for the recognition of NFE, the proposal by the European Commission to the Council of the European Union for a recommendation on the promotion and validation of non-formal and informal learning, which ministers are expected to endorse at the end of 2012 or early 2013. The Youth Forum contributed to the consultation during the development of the proposal, advocating strong but accessible validation mechanisms. The Youth Forum’s offcial reaction10 to the proposal outlined regretted that 9. The Pathways 2.0 document is the follow-on document of the 2004 document Pathways towards validation and recognition of education, training & learning in the youth feld. The document was elaborated jointly with the SALTO Training and Cooperation Resource Centre, the European Youth Forum and the directorates responsible for youth in the European Commission and the Council of Europe. 10. “Study on the impact of Non-Formal Education in youth organisations on young people’s employability”, available at http://issuu.com/yomag/docs/reportnfe_print/, last accessed on 22 February 2013.
Advocating for youth: the European Youth Forum
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
36
the Commission did not seize the opportunity to incorporate further elements of recognition, which would contribute to the development of a true lifelong learning society in Europe.
In 2012, the Youth Forum’s NFE Week focused on NFE and the employability skills which this can develop. The event demonstrated to EU policy makers and stakeholders, including those drafting the above recommendation, the importance of NFE for future employability of young people. This is part of a yearly dialogue on NFE the Youth Forum has organised over recent years with the aim of bringing together providers of education with institutions, social partners and stakeholders. The event serves as an open space for dialogue on specifc issues relating to NFE. To concentrate on 2012’s theme of employability, the Youth Forum commissioned a study on the impact of NFE in youth organisations for young people’s employment. The research was launched during NFE Week and brought visibility to the role of NFE within the area of Lifelong Learning (LLL).
D Quality Assurance The Youth Forum considers Quality Assurance (QA) in NFE a key process in enhancing recognition by relevant stakeholders of both the importance of NFE and also the role of youth organisations as primary NFE providers. Likewise, QA is deemed to be a valuable asset to organisations, as it contributes to an increasingly effective fulflment of their educational goals while also facilitating communication about the nature and quality of their NFE, both internally and also to stakeholders.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The Youth Forum continues the process started in 2009 to set up the frst Europeanwide QA scheme for NFE. The 2011 Revised Policy Paper on Quality Assurance (QA) of NFE (European Youth Forum 2011b; www.nfenetwork.eu) establishes the road map for its development. A series of training cycles have been held with the aim of building the capacity of Youth Forum member organisations in this feld. The Working Group on NFE, together with members of the Youth Forum Pool of Trainers (PoT), has been instrumental in promoting and disseminating the QA framework among the members. After a pilot phase of the proposed cycle for implementing QA in NFE projects and the consequent updates and improvements in the QA process, the next step foreseen is the establishment of a “co-managed support structure” (i.e. a network) by 2015 that will coordinate and provide support for the implementation of the Quality Assurance Framework for NFE. The QA process is thus an inclusive one: convinced that full recognition of NFE and its value for citizens in Europe will only be realised when policy makers start working together with providers of NFE on a common agenda, the European Youth Forum strives to join forces with all relevant institutions and stakeholders to take this process forward. A capacity-building programme has been developed to provide training on how the QA framework is to be implemented in a selected NFE project/activity. Both the QA framework and the training cycles have been tested since the pilot phase began in 2009. The feedback received by participating member organisations has been the basis for further development and improvement. Since the Quality Assurance Framework was frst piloted in 2009, a total of 15 member organisations have participated in the training cycles organised by the Youth Forum to build their capacity on QA.
David Garrahy
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
4 37
D Conclusion The Youth Forum continues to work and advocate for easier and more accessible opportunities for mobility and opportunities for NFE, especially for young people. There are fndings on the impact of NFE on youth organisations and young people which show that even short periods of mobility help in skills acquisition in young people, especially in language learning. For the Youth Forum, mobility and NFE are valuable experiences that need to be encouraged for young people. Mobility experiences give young people the vital skills they need, not only for future employment, but also to be citizens and active participants in society.
D References European Youth Forum (2000), Resolution on mobility of young people in Europe, 0745-00. European Youth Forum (2003), Policy Paper on NFE: Recognising our role, 0618-03. European Youth Forum (2005), Policy Paper on recognition of Non-Formal Education: confrming the real competencies of young people in the knowledge society, 0716-05.
European Youth Forum (2008a), Policy Paper on Non-Formal Education: A framework for indicating and assuring quality, 0009-08-FINAL.
European Youth Forum (2008b), Sunshine Report on Non-Formal Education. European Youth Forum (2007), Resolution: Europe is our Home – No Visas, 0373-07.
European Youth Forum (2011a), Revised Policy Paper on Quality Assurance of NFE, 0290-11.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
European Youth Forum (2011b) Implementation Plan 2011-2012, available at: http://intranet.youthforum.org/sites/default/fles/0945-10_Implementation_ Plan_2011-2012_fnal.pdf.
Advocating for youth: the European Youth Forum
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Majo Hansotte
Youth mobilities, step by step
I
n the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, the administration, policy makers and the National Youth Agency (Bureau International Jeunesse – BIJ), in charge of the implementation of the Youth in Action Programme, have drawn up a methodological framework to monitor youth initiatives at a local and international level. A step-by-step approach has been proposed in the feld of non-formal education. These are considered the essential steps to self-affrmation among young people.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The step-by-step approach mentioned here is purely indicative: stakeholders are free to explore the key steps through which their projects might be implemented. This framework serves as a reference for youth mobility practices. Starting from this point, together with the BIJ, many stakeholders have considered mobility issues and set up a “rating scale for mobility” which implies a step-by-step approach through the identifcation of barriers and the implementation of the mobility process. In the following pages, we ask you to examine this formalised process.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
40
Figure 1: The key steps to self-affrmation among young people
Communicating, learning, living together • Living in a mixed group; acting together • Experiencing international exchanges • Discovering languages and cultures • Discovering human rights, responding to injustices
Expressing and developing one’s creativity • Practising different arts, techniques and exploring different means of communication • Speaking up and defending one’s opinion
Creating and spreading a collective work • Setting up an initiative • Creating a performing work
Acting and initiating • Building up a long-term initiative or work. • Innovating • Engaging oneself for democracy and solidarity • Preparing one’s future and developing new competences through exposure to experiences
D You have mobilityÉand mobilities
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Mobilities rather than mobility Mobility is clearly not a panacea: it is however an indispensable way of working towards personal and collective emancipation and of ensuring the participation of young people in society. Mobility is also essential for the well-being and autonomy of human beings. All young people must be able to leave behind their own daily routines to step into different worlds or to make a contribution to society; they must have access to knowledge and culture, and be given leisure opportunities and a stage to express themselves. They must be able to travel to learn from other cultures, to become aware of their own identity, to gain new skills. They must have access to economic and social spheres. These kinds of challenges therefore invite us to consider mobility in the plural tense, which is why we will be talking of “youth mobilities”. Youth mobilities comprise all the personal and collective measures adopted to help young people follow a project and to advance in life, that bring about a change in their habits and that drive their emotional, social, cultural and professional development.
This implies working on three major aspects: geographical mobility, which relates to the possibility of “pulling up their roots” from a precise territory; social mobility, which covers all experiences that encourage the acquisition of knowledge and access to employment as well as to different social groups; and cultural mobility,
Majo Hansotte
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
5 41
which refers to transitions via which young people can succeed in stepping from one universe to another, from one language to another, from references imposed by their immediate environment to other references.
D MovingÉ Many young people in diffculty are often caught up in a dependent family or social context. However, our guess is that they want to leave behind this confnement, as borne out by the many cases of young people running away from home, or going to live on the streets, or even resorting to violence. Some of them wish to change their life script, and to go and see what else is out there, sometimes only around the corner: they seek another way of looking at things, another way of living, other symbols, other places…in short, new opportunities. Gender and cultural confnement In many working-class neighbourhoods, especially those composed of immigrant communities, many girls are not allowed to simply go out after school; generally speaking, they are not entitled to choose their own lifestyle. In youth centres, a growing feeling of being confned and controlled both by their peers and family (brothers, friends, cousins) can be noticed among girls. Religion and culture are indeed constantly used to limit their freedom. It may be noted that this binding culture of origin is completely imagined. In this light, it can be stated that some groundless references slowly emerge that have no historical basis. Cultures, therefore, need to be further explored in order to respond to this process of confnement. Encouraging young people to discover writers, poets, architects, sculptors, philosophers, flm-makers, painters, photographers, playwrights, historical fgures, scientists – through their respective cultural backgrounds, they could notably point out the key role of Art and Science in unlocking their daily codes. This is a prerequisite process.
D Stage 1: Mobility is not an easy option
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
You’re not budging from here! In an age of globalisation, mobility remains a luxury that is the reserve of the lucky few. We observe that for many young people today, immobility is gaining ground. In the age of the Internet, many young people never leave their friends, their neighbourhoods, their families, their habits: don’t they dare?
I’m afraid...I can’t do it! Many young people suffer from a lack of self-esteem, a fear of the unknown, a fear of failure.
In underprivileged areas, we are also seeing that young people are starting to mistrust youth workers and fnd it diffcult to picture their long-term future, to adopt a project approach. This diffculty is exacerbated by the importance they grant to the opinion of those around them and therefore escaping from this environment and from these opinions can be a good starting point. Finally, attitudes spawned by the culture of “the here and now” and a consumerist culture can also prove to be barriers to mobility, in particular through drug use and its immobilising effects.
Youth mobilities, step by step
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
42
Where does money come into it? Money is a problem! First of all because of the cost of public transport but also, in some cases, due to the diffculty of accepting the idea of doing something “for free” given that the foremost concern of young people is to earn money.
D Stage 2: making the move Pushing open an unknown doorÉnot very far away Methods and approaches that help to overcome the small and large local barriers are developed by the players in the feld on an everyday basis. The general principle behind these methods is to start with the experience of the young people in order to turn them into a learning support, with the emphasis on listening and discussion. The aim of these methods is to pave the way for a transition towards mobility, towards social change in gradual stages, both individually and collectively, using concrete and creative tools. In this respect, in issues linked to gender relations, the status of girls and boys also proves to be crucial.
Grabbing ideas Grabbing hold of an initial idea formulated by a young person or a group of young people as soon as it is tentatively expressed is a good starting point to build a mobility project. This involves listening to them, and knowing how to intervene by exploiting the dynamism of a group or a group’s desires, which is sometimes not easy to express. ItÕs possible for everyone! For a youth worker, it is important to be able to play down the obstacles linked to the fear of the unknown, the administrative procedures and the long-term diffculties by anticipating solutions and by providing for a network of partners. Setting up a network in which young people can trust well before the project is rolled out is crucial.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Understanding what is going on inside
Lots of young people are caught in limited and limiting “neighbourhood” logics, or are simply prisoners of their family circle. Sometimes silently, some young people are caught up in the maelstrom of drugs, alcohol or violence. These problems can also concern groups. The youth worker must be able to formulate a good diagnosis before trying to draw these young people into a mobility project, to try to unlock what is being shut away. Here and away How to foster self-esteem, openness, but also help each young person know himself or herself? Experience and imagination can often be exploited as precious catalysts that can trigger a mobility project, by geographically anchoring it into a local environment (neighbourhoods, village) that ties in with a more faraway environment.
Majo Hansotte
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
5 43
How to cross to the other side of the looking glass? Young people are also players in their own right in this adventure. Becoming heroes at home.
It is essential for a mobility project to address fundamental issues surrounding “life in my neighbourhood, with others, my family, etc.” The contact is established on the basis of an experience linked to the day-to-day life of young people in an immediate environment. When it comes to access to local or international mobility, another educative practice that is important is cultural mediation: daring to go into a museum, pushing open the door of a theatre. For many young people, another boon comes from the fact that a mobility project can be underpinned by work on theatrical, musical, videographic expression of which the young people can be proud and which they can show to other young people: theatre, music, videography, slam texts, and so on. Another ingredient is essential in this process: the project to go abroad or to welcome young people from abroad must obtain the backing of the family, and of other associations, potentially of the schools. Becoming reporters of their own history for other young people elsewhere
Travelling also means opening your eyes. And that starts by looking at your own region, your own living environment. How? Many young people are anxious to speak of their realities with young people from other countries. It is therefore important to support the desire of these young people to meet other young people from elsewhere through projects that talk about their life; this incorporates the desire to share diffculties and hopes with young people from elsewhere. Being responsible for their project Finally, it is useful for the young people to be fnancially involved in their project and for them to personally organise activities likely to bring in some money. This is a way of making them project carriers.
D Stage 3: Crossing borders
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Ok, off we go! Under what conditions can young people beneft from their experience in another country? This may involve speaking another language, experiencing another culture, knowing how to behave and putting aside their own habits, sometimes doing without that which is most important to them in their day-to-day life. WeÕre ready to go now, right this minute! But itÕs taking so much timeÉ A contrast sets in between the immediate urge and the long, drawn-out process. Many young people live in the here and now. However, the processes and procedures entailed by a planned stay abroad, whether a collective or individual project, often take time. It is diffcult to keep up one’s motivation. WeÕll never get there! The obstacles along the way include fear of self-assertion and fear of change. In quite a few cases, sudden changes appear in the personal or professional social
Youth mobilities, step by step
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
44
situation of the young people. Generally speaking, the young people sometimes fnd it diffcult to defne their project: what am I capable of, particularly in a foreign language? Given these diffculties, it is important to have access to a database, to organisations ready to welcome them and inform them. Empowering young people!
We do not take care of everything on behalf of the young people. The youth workers must allow young people to take their own initiative to foster their longterm autonomy. To encourage this autonomy, we underscore the importance of preparatory visits, in particular when the project concerns very vulnerable sections of the population. In this context, there is a clear interest in encouraging the creation of partnerships between institutions and associations in the feld to combine the travel project with a training process. No, they donÕt eat the way we do! Several young people want to make the move and at the same time do not want to give up on their little habits. It is incredible how many of them want to fnd their own “foodstyle” wherever they go, whether Africa, America or Europe! To leave or not to leave! Meeting other people without changing ourselves! All of that is impossible and the youth workers need to organise simulations to acquaint young people with a foreign reality. It is important for young people to learn the dos and don’ts of travel! A large number of young people are paradoxically limited by very community-based or very local living habits at a time when the Internet and social networks put them in touch with the whole wide world. In view of this, youth workers have to take up the challenge of teaching these young people to be good travellers. The aim is teach them respect towards those who will play host to them. To do so, the youth workers must help them discover and accept other ways of doing things: getting them used to eating unknown or unusual food, knowing how to thank their hosts for any gifts, knowing how to ft into new or strange settings or places, and not withdrawing into community or cultural habits that hamper the experience of being abroad and of foreignness.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Back already? In a great many cases, after a travel experience abroad, it is not easy coming back. This problem is underestimated at the beginning and not taken into account. The young person has changed and fnds it diffcult to get used again to his or her neighbourhood, family and friends, who have not changed. Certain associations have a minimal follow-through but in general the youth workers have little time and few resources to devote to returnees. The priority goes to the “new ones”. This diffculty of “fnding one’s feet” again on return can concern one young person in particular (for example the return from European Voluntary Service) or can concern a whole group of young people (for example the return from a youth exchange). In the case of a collective return, the follow-through has a very high importance. Building on the lessons learnt The experience of a stay abroad will be even more benefcial for young people if, upon their return, the environment is ready to recognise the achievements and to appreciate them. This appreciation can be expressed in everyday and family life;
Majo Hansotte
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
5 45
it can give rise, within the associations, to the presentation of concrete souvenirs or to internal discussions on what has been learnt and how this can be put to good use in future.
D Indicators and good practice To evaluate the quality of a mobility experience, fve criteria are important: • “leaving” must give the young person an additional “distinction”: an identifable “plus”; • they must have the certitude of fnding what there was before on their return: being sure of not losing anything; • they must have the feeling of being up to the new situation; • the support of a youth worker is indispensable, as someone who guarantees protection in the event of conficts, who has a positive view of the young person, and reassures them about what they are worth; • this youth worker must be the heart and soul behind the action, should draw pleasure from the process, and must be a key part of success and of failure.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Mobility, a step-by-step process to be fostered in the feld of non-formal education – this is the will expressed by the youth partners in the Wallonia-Brussels Federation.
Youth mobilities, step by step
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Making the move
“I found the courage to leave behind my family and friends, to fnd myself through others”
Self-esteem is of the essence when it comes to widening our horizons. Creative and educational approaches allow young people to gradually switch from one way of life to another. These are the measures and tools that help young people fnd their way.
Mobility isnÕt an easy option
“It’s not easy going to another area, another town, meeting other people…”
The frst step towards making the move is taken close to home, through a social and cultural local mobility venture. A great many obstacles have to be overcome but sometimes it doesn’t take much to unlock the doors of opportunity by frst focusing on the day-today life of each young person, taking into account their family life, isolation, housing situation, fnancial diffculties…
Table 1: Mobility step by step
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Crossing borders is one way of building selfconfdence. However, young people and those responsible for them sometimes tend to be too easily dissuaded by the language barrier. Above all, collective projects: a good trampoline.
“I found the courage to explore another country, another culture, to speak a foreign language…”
Crossing borders
Mobility is an indispensable condition for social inclusion. It is also essential for wellbeing and autonomy. Each young person must be able to access knowledge, other cultures, and must be able to travel for training purposes.
“I learned something important for my future life, as an individual and as a citizen…”
Learning and giving back
The mobility programmes encourage access to new professional environments, to new practices and organisations.
“I found the courage to push back my horizons, to get frst-hand experience of a practice, a trade, a professional environment…”
Discovering new practices
Which conditions need to be created for young people to be able to grab mobility opportunities that make an impression on their CV and increase their chances of employment?
“By accepting mobility, I improved my CV, my employability”
Putting all the chances on your side
46
Majo Hansotte
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Aleksandra Karlin´ska
Cross-border youth mobility, meeting the neighbours, learning from each other: international exchanges of young Poles and their peers from abroad D Introduction
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D
emocratic states are supposed to organise their educational systems in order to develop the skills and competences of young generations which will become active in contemporary society and in the labour market. In many European countries formal education is considered to take place in school, while non-formal education takes place outside the formal education system and is voluntary (Lafraya 2011). For many years already, non-formal education has been recognised as a valuable form of learning, providing the right background to support it within state youth policy. Moreover, mobility is considered an important element of the modern lifestyle, and participation in international youth projects is one of the main aspects of mobility in Europe. International youth exchanges, which require the mobility of young participants from different countries and nonformal education approaches, combine these two aspects and create at the same time a model of work with young people that is easily applicable under various circumstances and conditions and can be a good basis for cooperation between states. In this respect, the Polish authorities have developed a diversifed structure of mobility and
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
48
exchange schemes for young people, particularly with neighbouring countries, over the past couple of decades.
D The German-Polish Youth Offce: youth exchange as a way to reconciliation On 17 June 1991, the ministers of foreign affairs of Poland and Germany signed an agreement on German-Polish youth co-operation, establishing an intergovernmental youth exchange fund – the German-Polish Youth Offce (Deutsch-Polnisches Jugendwerk – DPJW). In this way, they realised the idea of the frst non-communist Polish Prime Minister, Tadeusz Mazowiecki, and the German Chancellor, Helmut Kohl – the idea of reconciliation of young people from both countries.
With the fall of the “Iron Curtain”, the end of communism in Eastern Europe and the process of reunifcation of Germany, these two leaders wanted to give a new impetus to relations between their countries; the driving force behind rapprochement would be the DPJW. After a diffcult and painful period of common history, the young people of both nations were given the opportunity to meet their neighbours, to establish friendships, and to overcome prejudices and stereotypes about each other. The DPJW was supposed to be based on the model of the French-German Youth Work (Deutsch-Französisches Jugendwerk – DFJW) existing since 1963.
The establishment of the DPJW was already foreseen in the Treaty on Good Neighbourship and Friendly Cooperation between Poland and Germany, which was signed at the same time (17 June 1991); this agreement constitutes a milestone in post-war Polish-German relations. It is worth mentioning that the treaty states explicitly that both parties are convinced that the mutual knowledge and understanding of young generations are essential to contributing to reconciliation between Polish and German societies.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The DPJW has the offcial status of an international organisation and it is the only one such bilateral institution in Poland. Its budget consists of national contributions from both governments. The organisation has two offces, located in Warsaw and in Potsdam.
The programme supports youth exchange and youth co-operation projects between Poles and Germans, though trilateral projects are also possible, and special agreements with France, the Russian Federation, Israel and the Czech Republic have been signed in this respect. The DPJW is open to all entities and initiatives. Its activities are based on partnership and equal co-operation between the Poles and the Germans. Its main objective is to contribute to the free personal development of young people and to learning to assume responsibility in society and the country. Active engagement and self-responsibility of youths are expected in all supported projects. Young people should acquire the ability to maintain new contacts on their own and – in that way – to contribute to sustainable co-operation between the two countries. In the 20-year history of the programme, the biggest interest in joint youth projects was noted immediately after Polish accession to the European Union in 2004. Obviously, such a new opening, a strong will to get to know the neighbours and their country and to work together was the impetus for the establishment of many new partnerships and projects.
Aleksandra Karlin´ska
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
6 49
The “Jugendwerk” (DPLW) supports Polish-German and trilateral projects (mostly with France, the Czech Republic, Ukraine and Russia), involving young people between 12 and 26 years, over 4-28 days. It is underlined that young people should be not only benefciaries, but also be actively involved in the preparation and running of the projects. The projects can involve, for example, trainings, sport activities or theatre workshops. The most important aim of the programme is to promote teamwork among the young participants. As the idea of reconciliation through youth exchange was a point of departure for creating the DPJW, today, the programme aims to respond to current needs and trends and is being enriched with new elements, such as Education for Sustainable Development. According to the application procedure, youth projects are divided in two general types: school exchanges and out-of-school activities. However, both are based on non-formal education methods, and their objective is active engagement of young participants. School partnerships constitute the most common basis for co-operation. Each year the programme supports out-of-school youth exchanges for more than 50 000 participants; the total number of young people participating in DPJW projects annually is more than 100 000. In 2010 and 2011, more than 3 100 projects have been fnanced in each year. The total number of projects implemented under the DPJW between 1993 and 2010 is almost 54 000 (Brodowski and Hetzer 2011).
To assure the quality of the youth meetings, the DPJW supports and organises conferences, seminars and trainings for professionals and practitioners dealing with youth work. In this respect, the organisation is also active in publishing. Taking into account the results of the last survey run from 2005 to 2010 (Ilg and Dubiski 2011), it becomes clear the DPJW has an important impact on implementing non-formal education in youth work. For example, language competence is an area where international meetings of young people can boast the best results. Over three quarters of the young participants of DPJW projects surveyed believe that the exchange has increased their language skills and 77% feel motivated to continue learning the language of those they are partnering with. Thanks to the personal experience of meeting new colleagues from other countries, this motivation becomes stronger, which is usually diffcult at school. International youth meetings are also an important site for acquiring social skills. In particular, they help young people to understand each other’s identities through the prism of their culture.11
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Polish-Lithuanian Youth Exchange Fund On 1 June 2007, the prime ministers of Poland and Lithuania signed an agreement on the Polish-Lithuanian Youth Exchange Fund (PLYEF). The Fund was established in order to bring the two nations closer by promoting the development of transboundary co-operation, developing actively friendly and good neighbourly relations, and inspiring cultural co-operation and promoting tolerance.
The budget of the Fund is composed of national contributions from the Polish Ministry of Education and the Lithuanian Ministry of Social Protection and Labour. So far, in the frst fve years of running the fund, there have been six calls for projects launched and 292 exchanges have been held involving young people from the two countries. Each has had its unique theme, with the help of which young people have been able to get to know better their peers from a neighbouring country. 11. More information at: www.pnwm.org and http://landkarte.dpjw.org/pl/hintergrund/, accessed 31 January 2013.
Cross-border youth mobility, meeting the neighbours
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
50
The call for projects and the selection are organised once a year. Young people aged 13-30 years and youth workers who are legal residents in Lithuania and Poland may participate. According to the rules of the competition, each project should be based on the principles of intercultural education, youth participation and equal partnership; this last rule is one of the main principles of the Fund, as all project activities must be based on an equal responsibility towards the partner. Both organisations (from the Polish and the Lithuanian side) taking part in the project should make a similar substantive contribution to the creation and implementation of the common initiative. This allows partner organisations to get to know each other, build trust and share experiences and good practices in developing common solutions. Active participation of young people in the projects helps to develop partnerships between youths and adults at all levels of activities, at every stage of the project: during creation, implementation, and fnally in the evaluation and dissemination of results. This enables young people to embrace meaningful roles in their group, and in society, allowing them their individual development through the achievement of new skills and improvement of competences. Their active participation should be seen as a learning process and – at the same time – the effect of an exchange. The guidelines to the Polish-Lithuanian Youth Exchange Fund indicate in a clear and detailed manner what kind of attitudes and behaviour should be promoted and maintained within a youth project in order to guarantee the active participation of young people (Przewodnik 2011). They include: • creating opportunities for interaction among participants, avoiding passive listening; • learning respect for individual knowledge and the skills of each participant; • ensuring participants’ infuence over project decisions, not just their participation in the project; • empowering as a key principle of the learning process, instead of just asking questions; • facilitators and trainers developing and maintaining a self-critical approach towards their own activities.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Many young people confrm that thanks to their participation in PLYEF projects they have changed their opinions about their neighbours; they have realised that, despite their proximity, they are quite different, live in another culture, have different opinions on many issues – but still, all of that does not exclude their joint work to achieve the aims of the project! One of the Polish young participants said: I was quite sceptical about participation in a Polish-Lithuanian exchange. I’ve never had to deal with people from Lithuania before, that’s why I was afraid of our meeting. Our activities were designed to learn how to accept and to share different views and to discuss them. We learned to work together in the group, each task required an agreement and listening to each other. Despite the disputes we were able to fnish the job and to present results of our work. The Polish-Lithuanian exchange was for me a lesson in acceptance, understanding, and above all the ability to be an objective person (Miłon´ 2012)
The results of the projects can be seen on many different levels: on the one hand, enhancing the capacity of youth organisations and their ongoing co-operation can be expected; on the other hand, young participants of the projects proft from
Aleksandra Karlin´ska
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
6 51
the non-formal education process by gaining new skills and broadening their horizons; fnally, on the political level, it is a fact that it is worth investing in the Polish-Lithuanian relations of young people who are supposed to build the future of the two countries.12
D Polish-Ukrainian Youth Exchange Since 2006, the National Centre for Culture of Poland has implemented the PolishUkrainian Youth Exchange, addressed to youngsters from Poland and Ukraine aged between 12 and 18 years. Currently, the programme is fnanced only by the Polish Government. The main objectives of the programme are: getting to know young people from the partner country, exploring cultural similarities and differences, as well as focusing on the local history of their home towns.
The programme has its particular cultural approach, as it derives directly from the agreement on co-operation between the Polish Ministry of Culture and National Heritage and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Ukraine. Therefore, entities allowed to apply for fnancial support are local cultural institutions and nongovernmental organisations active in the feld of culture. The projects must be planned and run in co-operation with Ukrainian partners and they have to include components on local history, regional culture and language learning. They can take place in Poland and in Ukraine; however, in this respect, co-operation between the regions of eastern and central Ukraine is particularly promoted. Young people should also be actively involved in planning the project activities. Within seven editions of the programme between 2006 and 2012, 729 projects for more than 32 000 young people took place in Poland and in Ukraine.13
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Polish-Russian Youth Exchange (since 2012) Based on different practices and experiences, and bearing in mind that youth exchange is an extremely effective tool in combating prejudices and stereotypes that might aggravate relations between neighbouring nations, a Polish-Russian Youth Exchange has been initiated within the activities of a new institution – the Centre for Polish-Russian Dialogue and Understanding. It is a legal entity, founded by an act of Parliament (Act of law 2011), the mission of which is to initiate and to support projects undertaken in Poland and in the Russian Federation and dedicated to improving dialogue and understanding between both countries. The Centre also works with Russian governmental institutions that are dedicated to the improvement of dialogue and understanding in Russian-Polish relations.
The Centre supports, in particular, academic work and publishing activities, which help to raise awareness and improve the knowledge of Poles and Russians on Polish-Russian relations, history and culture, as well as the common heritage of both nations within the territory of Poland, Russia and other countries. It is also dedicated to introducing and supporting educational initiatives on these topics, as well as organising conferences, symposia and other forms of meetings related to these issues. The Centre will support long-term co-operative projects which encourage bilateral dialogue and mutual understanding in bilateral relations. 12. More information at: www.plf.org.pl/, accessed 31 January 2013 13. More information at: www.nck.pl, accessed 31 January 2013.
Cross-border youth mobility, meeting the neighbours
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
52
Since the Centre was launched in 2011, there have been just two editions of the call for applicants launched. With the frst one 16 selected projects for 530 young people and students from Poland and Russia have been supported. The calls were open to any type of entity, for example schools, universities, foundations and nongovernmental organisations. It is worthwhile to mention that an original approach, of a non-formal education working method, will be proposed. All applications should explore one of the fve given priority subjects, which are focused on the historical, social and cultural background of Polish-Russian relations. With such an approach, young people have the possibility of completing their school curricula or even going further to make up a project according to their personal interests around these focus areas. Young participants are also expected to work actively, and on an individual basis to begin with, to prepare their project.
The massive interest generated proves a high demand for new youth exchange practices in bilateral relations between Poland and Russia, and this is one of the main reasons to continue the programme in the coming years.14
D International Youth Exchanges competitions of the Polish Ministry of National Education Youth exchange – as can be seen in all the examples above – is an important instrument in creating a targeted, modern youth policy for states. Therefore, each year the Ministry of National Education of the Republic of Poland supports tens of international youth projects actualised by Polish entities in co-operation with Eastern Partnership countries, the Russian Federation and Israel. This aims to improve relations between the young people of these countries and creates for the young project participants an excellent opportunity to explore the mutual history and culture of partner countries.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The exchanges are fnanced in the framework of open calls for projects. The selection procedure aims to promote projects which are based on non-formal education methods, develop the teamwork of participants and engage local communities. Finally, such international meetings should provide space for discussion on common history or contemporary youth culture. In 2011, 908 young people took part in this form of mobility; in 2012, there were more than 1 600. Among the projects funded in 2012, there have been 13 PolishUkrainian and three Polish-Belarussian projects, two of which are related to multilateral co-operation. The direction of international youth co-operation in Poland is based on current needs and interests.
Youth exchanges with Eastern Partnership countries and the Russian Federation are a particular priority for the Ministry of Education. This refects the focus on co-operation with eastern Europe and Caucasus countries that was explored during the Polish Presidency in the Council of European Union (July-December 2011). In executing the national priority to establish positive relationships with its eastern neighbours, Poland has been trying to make people recognise the advantages of co-operation with neighbours beyond the eastern border of the EU. Co-operation in the feld of youth should constitute a starting point for further integration with 14. More information at: www.cprdip.pl/main/index.php?id=wymiana-mlodziezy-i-studentow, accessed 31 January 2013.
Aleksandra Karlin´ska
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
6 53
this region, since political, cultural, social and economic co-operation is based on straightforward relations between people, friendship, tolerance and awareness of one’s own culture. The Polish EU Presidency’s efforts resulted in the adoption of the Council Conclusions on the Eastern Dimension of Youth Participation and Mobility by the EU’s Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council in November 2011. Since 2007, youth exchanges between Poland and Israel can be fnanced within calls for projects of the Ministry of Education. They are open to school co-operation, as well as to initiatives run by non-governmental organisations and youth associations at all levels (national, regional, local). The importance attached by both countries to the development of mutual relations and to raising awareness and knowledge about the history and culture of both nations among young people has been expressed in the documents of the Program of Cooperation on Youth Exchange for the years 2009-11 in 2009, as well as in the Joint Declaration signed in 2011. Last year, 8 joint projects for 160 participants were supported, while in 2012 the number of participants rose to 217 young people.
A particular dimension of Polish-Israeli youth exchanges is constituted of Holocaust education and remembrance. This topic is usually addressed within the youth meetings through study visits and special workshops run in the memorial areas.15
D Summary International youth meetings – in the form designed in governmental agreements and schemes – serve to overcome prejudices between youth representatives of different nations, and also help develop good neighbourhood relations. On the individual level, they constitute an opportunity for young people to make a particular learning mobility experience which is markedly different from regular school curricula. More generally, they prepare young people for living and working in a united Europe and in a globalised world. The main challenge is to keep a good balance between the quality and the quantity, within the available but often limited resourses, and to extend the amount of projects and the number of participants, with the assurance that an exchange will always be a valuable personal and learning experience.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D References Act of law of 25 March (2011), on the Centre for Polish-Russian Dialogue and Understanding, available at www.cprdip.pl/main/pliki/ustawa.pdf, accessed 31 January 2013. Brodowski J. and Hetzer T. (2011), Dane & Fakty, PNWM 1993-2010 w liczbach i wykresach, available at www.pnwm.org/fles/1340280412_dane_i_ fakty_1993_2010_pl.pdf, accessed 31 July 2012. Council conclusions on the Eastern dimension of youth mobility (2011), Offcial Journal of the European Union 2011/C 372/03. Ilg W. and Dubiski J. (2011), Spotkanie otwiera perspektywy. Empiryczne spojrzenie na mie˛dzynarodowa˛ wymiane˛ młodziez˙y, ISBN 978-3-9812076-7-5, p. 64-65.
15. More information at: www.men.gov.pl and www.polska-izrael.edu.pl, accessed 31 January 2013.
Cross-border youth mobility, meeting the neighbours
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
54
Lafraya S. (2011), Intercultural learning in non-formal education: theoretical frameworks and starting points, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, p. 9. Miłon´ E. (2012), “Sonda: Dlaczego warto realizowac´ polsko-litewskie projekty?” Europa dla Aktywnych, 7, Spring 2012, p. 9. Program of Cooperation on Youth Exchange between the Ministry of National Education of the Republic of Poland and the Israel Youth Exchange Council for the year 2009-2011 (2009), available at www.men.gov.pl/images/docs/wymiana_ mlodziezy/umowa.doc, accessed 30 November 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Przewodnik po Polsko-Litewskim Funduszu Wymiany Młodziez˙y na rok (2012), avaliable at www.plf.org.pl/sites/default/fles/Przewodnik_2012.pdf, accessed 30 July 2012.
Aleksandra Karlin´ska
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Reet Kost
Learning mobility in the youth feld: the Estonian experience with a European imprint D Setting the scene for learning mobility in Estonia
I
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
n modern societies, education is seen as the most important determinant of social position as well as a prerequisite for social mobility, avoiding unemployment, and so on. The extent and particular nature of its effect (to what degree it promotes or reduces inequality) depends on the organisation of the education system. Nowadays it is well understood that in order to help young people to achieve, general education needs to not only instil knowledge about facts but also shape young people’s key competences. The importance of learning as a lifelong objective is increasingly acknowledged, therefore it is necessary to help learners develop their own intellectual tools and learning strategies. Even if we still have a long way to go, this means that the focus of education is inevitably shifting from teaching to learning.
All the reasons given above and the consistent decrease in the number of young people due to the demographic changes in Estonia have paved the way for recent reforms in the education system. Extensive reforms within primary and secondary education as
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
56
well as higher education have taken place, resulting in changes in curricula, conditions and the governance of general and higher education. This will of course affect Estonian development in the long run.
When looking at where learning mobility stands in this context, one fnds that the conditions set by our national policy give it a rather prominent standing, although mostly in the feld of higher education, where the promotion of internationalisation and student mobility in the interests of obtaining a more diverse education is of key importance. According to the government’s policy objectives, supporting the internationalisation of higher education creates an opportunity for Estonian students in higher education to widen their horizons, obtain experience studying and living in different cultural environments, and make contacts. All of these are important components in later working life in an increasingly global world. The internationalisation of higher education encompasses both the mobility programmes aimed at Estonian students and faculty as well as measures for encouraging foreign students and faculty to come to Estonia (Estonian Government 2011). However, only about 3% of Estonian university students currently spend time studying abroad. The target set in the European Higher Education Area is for 20% of graduates to have mobility experience by 2020. So we are some distance away from the set objective.
But why look at it in such a limited way, especially when one can see the benefts of non-formal learning and learning mobility in the youth feld contributing to the described aims equally? International youth work is another sphere in Estonia where learning mobility is considered to be an effective means of cultivating a wide range of life skills, in particular the intercultural competences considered important for future societies characterised by diversity.
D Learning mobility in the youth feld, with a European imprint
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The conditions for activities in the youth feld are laid out in the Estonian Youth Work Strategy 2006-2013, which defnes the goals to achieve and the measures to be implemented in the given time frame in order to further develop youth policy and one of its domains – youth work16 – in Estonia. It is worth mentioning that the Estonian Youth Policy and Youth Work Strategy are largely grounded in the White Paper on Youth Policy of the EU and the framework of the EU youth policy co-operation as well as the Council of Europe framework for youth policy and related indicators. Given the wide scope of youth work in Estonia, the strategy defnes 10 felds of action, among which international youth work aims at creating opportunities for youth and youth workers for acquiring international co-operation experience and learning from other cultures (Estonian Youth Work Strategy 2006-2013). The national strategy has been updated as a consequence of policy and practice developments at national and European level, taking the form of biannual implementation plans that are approved and monitored by the government. For the period 2011 to 2013, support to international youth work and co-operation including learning mobility in the youth feld has become a priority. The reason 16. Youth work: one of the activity areas of Estonian youth policy that creates possibilities for young people aged 7 to 26 for the versatile development of their personality in addition to formal education, work and family (Estonian Youth Work Act 1999, amended in 2010).
Reet Kost
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
7 57
for this is the value seen in peer learning, exchange of expert knowledge and co-operation in contributing towards better targeting the aims and objectives set for Estonian youth policy and in advancing in European youth policy priority felds. Safeguarding the European instrument (namely the Youth in Action Programme) and fostering youth policy development (specifcally the youth work sector) through international co-operation and learning mobility is considered to be of paramount importance. The endorsement of this priority by the government has helped us a great deal throughout the debates setting the scene for the continuity of the EU youth programme in the future.
D What makes a difference – the biggest contributors to the advancement of learning mobility in the youth feld When looking at the conditions created for learning mobility in the youth feld since the Soviet era (when learning mobility did exist but in a completely different “spirit” and space), it is important to assess how we got here and what has affected us the most.
First of all, important heritage was retained in the sense that youth work had educational value and the tracks laid out for the future were rational. Without a doubt early and stable bilateral co-operation with Nordic countries with particular emphasis on youth policy played its part. Estonia has also, with remarkable rapidity, entered various types of European partnerships on an equal footing, so one can say that we appeared to be well prepared for our own ambitions of becoming a modern, European country as quickly as possible. In the process of reconstructing a modern youth policy, Estonia has used previous advantages together with a conscious European orientation. At state and local levels various bilateral and multilateral channels have been used for study visits and exchange of staff and youth groups, with the clear purpose of gaining experience and forming opinions on solutions for youth work and policies (CDEJ 2000).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The biggest systemic effect related to learning mobility has been achieved through Estonia’s participation in the Youth for Europe Programme and its successors YOUTH and Youth in Action (YiA), as has the establishment of the National Agency in 1997, through which an important contribution has been made to the development, internationalisation and quality of youth work at all levels. The strategies applied by the National Agency, as of the beginning of the programme, have certainly been one of the preconditions of the success of the YOUTH Programme. The National Agency has not only been an intermediary, but an active infuencer in the Estonian youth feld by participating actively in the development of youth work concepts and youth worker training, thereby learning about the daily problems of young people and youth workers. The National Agency and the smallness of Estonia allow one to see the real life behind the priorities of the programme – from the grassroots level to the development of youth policy (Jõe et al. 2003).
The latter is especially important given our point of departure, in the sense that youth work had to be “started” all over again and the establishment of youth work structures had only begun when the National Agency was created. It was largely thanks to the Training and Co-operation plan of the National Agency that we were able to support the necessary developments in the youth feld, including becoming competent in fostering quality in non-formal learning activities with intercultural dimensions and enabling partnership building to give them a solid basis.
Learning mobility in the youth feld: the Estonian experience
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
58
The EU youth programme has also been a major instrument in supporting the learning mobility projects of individuals and groups of young people in Estonia, allowing more than 3 600 Estonian young people17 yearly to experience international co-operation and acquire competences needed to make it in the modern world. With reference to the policy goals on learning mobility of young people, this output by far tops the yearly statistics on student mobility for Estonia!
Having said that it’s worth emphasising that pure determination would probably not have been enough for the modernisation of youth work and bringing about new forms of youth participation, because of the lack of fnancial resources in Estonia for the sector and policy feld and the low levels of recognition, especially in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Nowadays the value of young people’s engagement in international non-formal learning activities is no longer debated. Nevertheless it clearly has not reached a level whereby the activities of non-formal learning mobility are taken into consideration when planning the state budget, as has been the case for student mobility in higher education (especially for master’s and doctoral levels), where the government has decided to invest both national and European Social Fund money, enabling a tripling of Estonian students in comparison to those in the Erasmus Programme. To cut a long story short, learning mobility in the youth feld would probably not have come that far in Estonia without the support and co-operation of European institutions and the EU contribution to the decentralised implementation of EU youth programmes over the past decade and a half.
D WhatÕs in it for youth? Having described the evolution and the most important aspects of the development of the conditions for learning mobility, an important question to ask is: what is the actual impact of all this on young people, the youth sector and society as a whole? When it comes to Estonia, the following can be said at least, based on extensive academic research (using quantitative and qualitative methods) carried out from 2003 to 2011 on the impact of EU youth programmes in Estonia. Learning mobility outcomes for young people
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The research results indicate that the YiA Programme contributes to a large extent to competence development, active citizenship and participation in civil society and political life, but also to employability (Chisholm et al. 2012).
Of the young people that participated in the study, 77% believe that their job prospects have improved and that the Programme has helped them with making decisions about their future careers. Sixty-fve percent agreed that they now have a clearer idea about their educational pathways and 72% agreed that they now have a clearer idea about their professional career aspirations and goals (Murakas et al. 2010). Most of the respondents noticed improvement in their social skills. Such skills include co-operation skills, negotiation skills, the ability to get along with people from different cultural backgrounds and communicate in a foreign language, as well as the ability to express ideas in discussions and make oneself understood – development of these skills was reported by at least 80% of the respondents. Nearly the same percentage (76%) of the respondents planned to go abroad to study, work or do an apprenticeship and 90% of the respondents planned to improve their language skills in the future. 17. Number of Estonian young people directly involved in individual or group mobility projects of the YiA programme (Estonian YiA National Agency statistical report 2011).
Reet Kost
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
7 59
Furthermore, improvement in general and cross-cultural tolerance and the placing of more value on one’s own culture can be observed. Contacts with other people and representatives of other cultures is believed to be essential in bringing about all these developments. This is what provides an understanding of diversity as well as one’s own uniqueness and value. Fostering European identity The European Union has spent millions of euros over the last couple of years on education, training and youth programmes. One of the main objectives of these programmes is to stimulate participation and develop a sense of European identity. Commission-funded programmes, such as Leonardo and Socrates, do not always have such explicit citizenship education objectives but they are opportunities to bring rhetoric about European citizenship to the forefront and help put it into practice (Osler and Starkey 1999). Although the EU, as also the Council of Europe and even the national governments, have made a considerable effort to stimulate the promotion of a European dimension in the teaching of civic education, a comparative study of citizenship education documents shows that, compared to the emphasis on national issues, the European dimension remains rather neglected (Eurydice 2005). Looking further into national research on this subject one fnds that when European identity and support for the EU is compared between past and future Erasmus students, no signifcant differences appear to be present. Participation in the Erasmus Programme appears to have no impact on European identity since participating students are more likely to feel European before participating in the exchange (Pilviste 2012). It may well be that those going for Erasmus student exchanges have been previously active in youth projects with a European dimension, where the favourable attitude towards Europe is frst actualised.
European citizenship – making young people aware that they are European citizens and ensuring that they engage themselves actively in European issues – is also a priority in the Youth in Action Programme (European Parliament and Council 2006).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
YiA research fndings show strong effects on participants with respect to attitudes and values related to active citizenship and participation as well as “feeling like a European” and being interested in European topics. Particularly strong effects are expressed with respect to knowledge about Europe, awareness of European values, awareness of inequality in society – in particular of people with fewer opportunities – but also increased knowledge about Europe, inclusion and youth policies (Chisholm et al. 2012).
Non-formal learning mobility experiences have turned out to be an important factor contributing to the formation of personal attitudes. Through these experiences it has become clear that integration does not merely mean visa-free movement between different states and that the whole process is far more complex – there are psychological and emotional borders to be crossed. This effect on young people is also important because low awareness can and has caused prejudices and fears associated with the EU and such apprehensions can by no means be underestimated.
D The impact of European Voluntary Service on third sector development When refecting on the impact of the European Voluntary Service (EVS), two aspects should be kept in mind – the objectives and priorities of the programme and the conditions and environment where an attempt to achieve those objectives is made.
Learning mobility in the youth feld: the Estonian experience
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
60
In the case of Estonia, after the long forced pause in the active development of civil society, the conditions for the implementation of the EVS were insuffcient especially during the early years of programme implementation. Although people knew in general what voluntary work was in theory, the respective attitudes and values involved were not adopted in Estonia as quickly. On the one hand, there were too many organisations that were associated in people’s minds with the legacy of Soviet voluntary obligation. On the other hand there was this new opportunity for young people to volunteer without specialisation or experience that benefted not only society in general but individuals, organisations and communities. So it was something new to understand and to adapt to for those receiving foreign volunteers for the frst time as it was for those local communities where EVS programmes took place. While it was not diffcult to motivate young people (the activities created great interest), the contribution of organisations (willingness and also capability) was not suffcient. A lot of effort had to be put into actively promoting the concept of EVS in Estonian society. Since then, however, the EVS has been quickly growing in numbers of both outgoing and incoming volunteers. Besides these easily measurable effects we can also see more systemic consequences. For one, volunteering abroad has become popular among Estonian young people and gives a solid alternative to student mobility schemes. Secondly, EVS has contributed strongly to the development of competences and the readiness, intentions and plans with respect to educational and professional development of the young people involved. Thirdly, it has helped to build capacity and internationalise third sector organisations and contributed to the creation of such organisations in Estonia. In fact the main organisation dealing with the development and co-ordination of voluntary activities in Estonia was created as a result of the EVS within the framework of the EU youth programme.
D Outcomes for the youth sector and youth policy
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
According to the research on the competences of Estonian youth workers conducted in 2005 and 2010, the international training activities of the Estonian National Agency occupy a prominent place alongside the different formal and non-formal training providers in the youth work feld. The studies also tell us that in Estonia, where the youth work sector is still rather young and dynamic, non-formal learning mobility opportunities are an important complement in youth workers’ professional development to formal learning possibilities.
Next to the impact on professionalisation of the (national) youth work sector, learning mobility activities have also had an effect on bridging important youth policy issues such recognition of non-formal learning, promotion of young people’s active citizenship and human rights, combating social discrimination, and so on. Also, efforts to build more inter-sector co-operation activities at European level in recent years have paid off in creating synergies with other sectors targeting youth, including their development and involvement in society through education and training, employment and social care. As a result we can see more initiatives taken by the youth sector to stimulate practices involving relevant stakeholders to create better conditions for young people’s development. To a large extent, Estonian secondary education has essentially been based on knowledge of facts rather than development and expression of one’s opinion. The
Reet Kost
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
7 61
same can be said about the Estonian youth work scene in the early 1990s and its heavy pedagogical and instructional tradition (CDEJ 2000). One of the EU youth programme’s advantages, valued by participants, is the fact that a very different approach from formal education often motivates young people to learn (Murakas et al. 2007). Further, non-formal learning mobility projects have certainly functioned as new forms of youth work. The young people involved have been given more freedom to explore and experiment with their own ideas and take responsibility for the success of their own learning. This without doubt carries an important function of social integration.
D Fostering non-formal learning Non-formal learning – its principles and practice – have always been at the heart of the National Agency’s systematic approach in supporting the development of the youth work sector in Estonia. It has been the core criterion in assessing learning mobility project ideas and applications submitted to the National Agency. In order to support the quality of non-formal learning in the youth feld, a series of training activities oriented at competence building with European partners and nationally have been organised.
At the same time it’s been important to address the recognition aspect of non-formal learning in society, targeting also the employment and formal education sector alongside the youth sector. As an example, the frst public discussion around the importance and quality of non-formal learning in youth activities, in the form of a national conference, was organised in 2003. Another more in-depth step towards supporting the implementation of non-formal learning principles in everyday youth work was taken by the National Agency in 2005 through the organisation of a summer school on non-formal learning for youth workers, people responsible for youth worker curricula development, youth researchers and trainers active in youth work.
D Future perspectives and further developments
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Work related to learning mobility is never done! A lot still has to be done with regard to building trust and changing the culture and attitudes toward non-formal and informal learning in Estonia. Taking prior learning acquired in youth work seriously is still a big challenge to be overcome by both general education as well as most higher education institutions and employers. The European policy developments are surely of great help to us but the principles and systems of validation in Estonia also need revamping. In order to build trust and acknowledge learning in the youth feld, it is important to explore the effects of learning mobility projects and generate new knowledge about the processes and outcomes of non-formal learning activities in general, and more specifcally in non-formal learning activities in the youth feld with an international dimension.
D Reaching the unreachable Another challenge involves reaching young people with fewer opportunities who are today certainly underrepresented in mobility schemes. Mobility involving young people with fewer opportunities requires, however, continuity, stable structures and youth workers able and willing to contribute to inclusion. Even though we have taken a giant leap forward in making social inclusion a priority in the youth policy
Learning mobility in the youth feld: the Estonian experience
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
62
agenda, there’s still a long way to go in developing everyday youth work practice that is more responsive to young people’s needs and transnational mobility projects that reach out to those who do not even know or dare to consider that this might be something for them. Strengthening the youth work sector to really have a signifcant effect is a work in progress in Estonia and needs to be continued.
D To be continuedÉ To be able to continue supporting young people’s non-formal learning mobility in the future, the words setting it as a priority must turn into action. Estonia’s experience shows that when it comes to creating related conditions, we are very much dependent on European support. I certainly hope that with the new EU programming period learning mobility opportunities for the youth feld will grow in terms of quantity, accessibility, quality and diversity and that the national systems of support will be safeguarded and further developed.
D References Chisholm L. et al. (2012), “Transnational analysis of the research-based analysis of the Youth in Action programme 2010-2011”, Innsbruck, pp. 18-22.
Estonian Government (2011), National Reform Programme “Estonia 2020 – Estonia’s competitiveness strategy for achieving the objectives of Europe 2020”. The Ministry of Education and Research of Estonia (2006), Estonian Youth Work Strategy 2006-2013, Tartu.
Eurydice (2005), Citizenship education at schools in Europe, available at www.eurydice.org, accessed 7 April 2009.
Jõe H., Oga T. and Sikk T. (2003), Impact assessment of the Youth in Action programme in Estonia 2000-2002, Estonian Youth Institute NGO. Murakas R. et al. (2010), Interim evaluation of the Youth in Action programme in Estonia 2007-2009, Tartu University Institute of Sociology and Social Policy.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Murakas R. et al. (2007), Interim evaluation of the Youth in Action programme in Estonia 2000-2006, Tartu University Institute of Sociology and Social Policy. Osler A. and Starkey H. (1999), “Rights, identities and inclusion: European action programmes as political education”, Oxford Review of Education, 25 (1-2), pp. 199-215. Pilviste J. (2012), “Effects of Erasmus Program on European Identity”, Master’s thesis at Tartu University Institute of Sociology and Social Policy.
Verdyck R. et al. (2000), Youth policy in Estonia. Report by an international group of experts appointed by the Council of Europe, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg.
Reet Kost
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Helmut Fennes
What are the effects of international youth mobility projects? Research-based analysis of Youth in Action D Introduction
I
t is a widely accepted hypothesis that travelling, experiences in foreign environments, encounters with different cultures and the like can provide for personal development, learning experiences and education. This notion is at least part of the rationale for most international/transnational exchange programmes18 established during the past decades, but it was also at the origin of mobility in previous centuries, for example the mobility of travelling craftspersons.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
But what is actually learned through these kinds of experiences? And how does such learning take place?
There is limited evidence regarding the effects of international mobility/learning experiences in general. Research in this feld is rather fragmented and focused on (individual) student exchanges – therefore in the context of formal education 18. The term “exchange programme” might be misunderstood, suggesting reciprocity of visits between different partners/countries, but has become synonymous for any kind of international/transnational encounter with an (explicitly or implicitly intended) educational dimension.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
64
or internships, work placements or voluntary placements abroad – in the context of work-related learning. While these studies might also refer to informal learning rather as an added value, there is limited evidence about the effects of mobility projects aimed (explicitly or implicitly) at non-formal learning, that is youth exchanges or mobility projects in the feld of non-formal youth and adult education.
While evaluations of the various international mobility programmes explore if, and possibly also to what extent the objectives of the respective programmes are met, there is little knowledge about their effects at large, whether intended or not. This was the starting point for the ongoing project Research-based Analysis and Monitoring of Youth in Action (RAY): what is learned by actors involved in international/transnational projects in the youth feld, no matter if intended or not, and how does this learning take place? The EU programme Youth in Action (YiA) provides for a broad range of formats of international learning/mobility experiences and thus for an enormous research feld with access to large amounts of data on potentially far beyond the 100 000 persons involved in this programme every year.
D Rationale: why research-based analysis and monitoring of Youth in Action?
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
There are various reasons for pursuing research-based analysis and monitoring of the Youth in Action (YiA) Programme: policy makers are interested in the impact and sustainability of the measures established to implement policies as well as in demonstrating that public funds are being spent effectively and effciently; practitioners are interested in their own and their colleagues’ professional development as well as in demonstrating to others that they are doing a good job; and researchers are interested in generating knowledge and understanding about the design, processes and outcomes of (international) youth work and non-formal learning in the youth feld. A shared motivation is to identify and understand quality in all its expressions in order to recognise and improve youth work and non-formal youth education. While research cannot ultimately decide what quality is, it provides a relatively neutral and autonomous sphere in which different examples of process and outcome can be placed for observation and discussion, enabling a distanced and external view of phenomena and offering an analysis in relation to hypotheses and expectations. In this respect, research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA can help to provide a solid foundation for decisions about “what else” and “what more” can be done to improve the quality of experience and impact of activities supported under European youth programmes.
D Objectives and research questions Research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA is ultimately aimed at producing reliable and valid documentation and understanding of the processes and outcomes of the YiA Programme and of the activities it supports. “Research-based” implies that the approach is systematic, neutral, evidential and transparent in attempting to understand the meaning and signifcance of the phenomena explored, no matter if they were intended or not. In this respect, research-based analysis of YiA goes beyond and at the same time differs from an evaluation which ultimately implies a judgement by relating the fndings to aims and objectives of the evaluated phenomena.
Helmut Fennes
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
8 65
In view of the rationale outlined above, the main objectives of research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA are to: • contribute to quality assurance and development in the implementation of YiA; • contribute to evidence-based and research-informed youth policy development; • develop a better understanding about processes and outcomes of non-formal education activities, in particular in the youth feld.
In this respect, the main questions addressed in research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA are: what is the effect of YiA projects on the actors involved and on the respective groups, organisations, institutions and structures? More specifcally, what do participants, youth workers and youth leaders participating in YiA projects learn and which competences do they acquire thereby, in particular, with respect to attitudes, competences and behaviour related to active/democratic citizenship and participation in civil society and political life? At the same time, it is explored how the actors involved in YiA projects do learn: how do they develop their competences? Which pedagogic approaches, methodologies and methods are applied in the projects and how are they implemented? Furthermore, researchbased analysis and monitoring of YiA aims at studying the effects on organisations involved in these projects and on youth structures at large as well as the effects on local project environments.
D Research approach and methods In principle, this research initiative takes a multi-method approach which envisages a combination of quantitative and qualitative social research methods and instruments, providing for a triangulation of methods, data and outcomes: • standardised surveys with project participants and project leaders, key staff of benefciary organisations as well as applicant organisations which were rejected; • case studies of selected projects as well as longitudinal studies; • action research in selected projects; • interviews with different actors involved in YiA, including youth leaders and youth workers not participating in YiA; • focus groups/group discussions with project participants.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D The development of research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA Research on European youth programmes is not new: there have been a number of studies on various aspects of these programmes in the past, partly commissioned by European institutions, partly resulting from national initiatives and partly as student dissertations or master/diploma theses. The starting point of the present initiative dates back to when research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA was established as an inherent element of YiA Programme implementation in Austria in 2007 with its assignment to the Institute of Educational Science at the University of Innsbruck for the full duration of the programme, until 2013 (Chisholm et al. 2011; Helling et al. 2011).19 In 2008, the Austrian National Agency of the YiA Programme, in particular its consortium partners Interkulturelles Zentrum and the Institute of Educational Science at 19. See also http://homepage.uibk.ac.at/~c603207/projects.html#p13, accessed 31 October 2012. Respective research reports are also available in German at http://homepage.uibk.ac.at/~c603207/ projekte.html#p13, accessed 31 October 2012.
What are the effects of international youth mobility projects?
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
66
the University of Innsbruck, initiated the establishment of an international network and the development of joint transnational research activities related to YiA in line with the objectives outlined above. A frst network meeting took place in Innsbruck in June 2008, involving YiA national agencies and their research partners from Austria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany and the Slovak Republic. Since then, network meetings have taken place twice a year, aimed at developing and coordinating research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA and its implementation. Presently this network for research-based analysis of YiA (the RAY network) involves the YiA national agencies and their research partners from 16 countries: Austria, Belgium (Flemish-speaking region), Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands (until 2011), Poland, the Slovak Republic, Sweden and Turkey.
D The added value of an international research approach At national level, research instruments and methods are usually developed and applied in only one language – normally the language of the country where the research takes place (exceptions are countries with more than one offcial language, or research specifcally aimed at involving linguistic minorities). For research in a national context this research approach is normally suffcient.
When it comes to research in an international context – which is the case for researchbased analysis and monitoring of YiA – it is normally necessary to work in more languages. While it might be possible to work with one or more languages which are largely understood in an international context (such as English, French, Spanish, Russian, etc.) these languages might still be foreign languages for most people involved/ addressed, and only for a minority might they be a frst language/mother tongue. In the case of research-based analysis of YiA, a purely national approach can normally involve only actors from the respective country – and not actors from other countries who were involved in activities funded through the national agency of that country (at least not in their frst language). The RAY network allows its partners to address and involve YiA actors in projects funded by them in 14 different languages currently (including in English, French, German and Russian) and to address and involve actors from their country in projects which were funded by national agencies in 16 different countries at present: this provides for a truly international research approach and for transnational analyses of the responses.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Research activities Based on concepts and research instruments developed by the Institute of Educational Science at the University of Innsbruck, two multilingual online questionnaires in 14 languages20 were created – one for participants and one for project leaders/team members of YiA-funded projects. Between October 2009 and November 2011, more than 45 000 participants and project leaders/team members of YiA projects were invited to complete these online surveys and more than 15 000 did so. RAY network members analysed the responses for projects funded through their YiA national agencies; a frst transnational analysis of data collected between October 2009 and June 2010 was presented in 2011 (Fennes et al. 2011), and a second transnational analysis of data collected in November 2010 and in May 2011 was presented in 2012 (Fennes et al. 2012). 20. Bulgarian, Czech, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Polish, Russian, Slovak, Swedish and Turkish.
Helmut Fennes
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
8 67
These “standard surveys” will be continued by the RAY network on an annual basis in order to collate a suffcient number of responses, also at national level, to provide for meaningful results throughout the duration of the programme (until 2013) and possibly beyond, since many projects funded by the YiA Programme will not end until 2014. Furthermore, a study on non-formal education and learning in YiA projects has been developed with a view to exploring which conditions and contexts support learning and the development of key competences in YiA projects and beyond. This study is based on a “special survey” with multilingual online questionnaires for project participants and for project leaders/team members in 14 languages (see above) as well as qualitative methods involving interviews with project leaders and group discussions with project participants, thus providing for a triangulation of data and outcomes. The online surveys were implemented in May and November 2012. The qualitative methods will be implemented during the frst half of 2013. Accordingly, the publication of a research report is planned for the second half of 2013. Finally, a study on competence development in YiA projects has been developed by a group of RAY network members, to be implemented in autumn 2012. This study should also validate some of the results of the standard surveys. A research report should be available early in 2013.
D Conclusions The Transnational Analysis 2011 arrives at the following main conclusions (see Fennes et al. 2012).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Participation in YiA projects contributes to the development of all key competences for lifelong learning. While the most distinct development is reported for interpersonal, social and intercultural competence as well as communication in a foreign language (as might be expected), a signifcant development is also reported for sense of entrepreneurship, civic competence, cultural awareness and expression and learning competence (learning to learn). Distinct developments can also be found for communication in the frst language (mother tongue), mathematical competence and sense of initiative.21 All other competences are reported to be developed for a minority of participants. The self-assessment of participants is confrmed by the assessment by the project leaders of the participants’ competence development, showing a highly signifcant correlation between self-perception and external perception by the project leaders.
Involvement in YiA projects contributes specifcally to the development of citizenship competences in a broad sense, in particular interpersonal, social, intercultural and foreign-language competences of both participants and project leaders. This includes the development of respective skills, but also of attitudes, values and knowledge. The responses also indicate that involvement in the projects results in an increased participation in social and political life. The development of civic skills and competences for political participation in a more traditional way is less distinct, as is the acquisition of new knowledge on discrimination, people with a disability, gender equality and minorities. 21. Some of the eight key competences defned in the European reference framework for key competences for lifelong learning were divided into sub-competences. In particular, “interpersonal, social, intercultural and civic competence” was divided into three sub-competences: “interpersonal and social”, “intercultural” and “civic”.
What are the effects of international youth mobility projects?
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
68
A signifcant fnding is that YiA projects also have an effect on the development of the organisations, groups and bodies involved, thus creating “learning organisations”. On the one hand, this is demonstrated by an overall competence development reported by the project leaders resulting from their involvement in the project – similar to the competence development observed for the project participants (see above). Beyond the development of key competences for lifelong learning, youth workers and youth leaders also report that their youth work competences were developed, in particular with respect to non-formal education and international youth projects. This development of general and specifc competences refects “workplace learning” or “work-related learning” and contributes to professionalisation and organisational development, including cases where project leaders were involved as volunteers. On the other hand, project leaders and participating youth workers/leaders also report that their projects have had a signifcant effect on their organisations, groups and youth structures, in particular with respect to an internationalisation of the organisations and their activities, an increased promotion of participation and active citizenship in their organisations, and organisational development in general: this suggests that organisations, groups and structures involved in YiA projects are developing into “learning organisations”.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The results of the surveys also indicate that the involvement in YiA projects stimulated both participants and project leaders to consider or actually plan further educational activities and their professional development. Furthermore, a large majority of participants and project leaders believe that their job opportunities have increased at least to some extent: together with the competence development outlined above, this refects an effect on the professional development of the actors involved in the YiA Programme beyond the youth feld and civil society, especially in view of their involvement in the work domain. This points towards a signifcant effect complementing the social, cultural and political dimensions of the YiA Programme. As for the profle of the young people participating in YiA projects, a divide can be observed. On the one hand, there is a group of participants who clearly belong to the anticipated target group of the YiA Programme: young people with fewer opportunities who are confronted with obstacles to their access to education, work, mobility and participation in society; the size of this group is hard to grasp because it is diffcult to assess who is actually disadvantaged depending on the specifc contexts. On the other hand, a considerable majority of participants are well educated, in education or training, employed or volunteering/doing an internship; they originate from the majority population with respect to language and cultural/ethnic background, and many of them have already participated in similar projects. These characteristics point to a group that is not disadvantaged. Nevertheless, there is a clear interest and effort on the part of project promoters to include young people with fewer opportunities: a vast majority of the participants in training and networking projects are reported to be youth workers/leaders who work with young people with fewer opportunities. A differentiated analysis by project types of YiA confrms that there are “allrounders” with a broad range of effects and effects which are mostly on average or above; there are “specialists” with a few effects (considerably) above average, but otherwise relatively weak effects; and there are project types which are somewhere in between – with partial effects (considerably) above average and partial effects (considerably) below average. Overall, there is no indication that the project duration has an effect on the responses on effects, for example that projects with a continuous engagement on a day-to-day basis have stronger/more effect than projects with short intensive phases.
Helmut Fennes
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
8 69
A differentiated analysis depending on whether the project took place in the participant’s or project leader’s country of residence or in another country illustrates that for both types of experiences there are positive effects resulting from their involvement in the project, and that the effects on the “hosting” side (of projects taking place in the participant’s or project leader’s country of residence) are at least as strong as on the “sending” side (of projects taking place abroad) – and are possibly even stronger in many cases.
D Future perspectives There is substantial potential to expand and further develop the research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA, on the one hand by enlarging the RAY network (which is demonstrated by an expressed interest by new partners/countries), and on the other hand by developing existing and new research instruments and studies. This would not only depend on the allocation of respective additional resources to this initiative, but also on strengthening the links and the dialogue between research, policy and practice. Further, the concept of research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA could be appropriately applied in other international (learning) mobility programmes, including in the feld of formal education and in vocational education and training, as well as in other institutional and geographical contexts.
D References Chisholm L. et al. (2011), “What has ‘Youth in Action’ achieved in Austria? Research-based analysis and monitoring of Youth in Action: Summary of results”, University of Innsbruck, available at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/45733110/projects/ YiA/JiA_WB_Zusammenfassung2009en.pdf, accessed 31 October 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Fennes H., Gadinger S. and Hagleitner W. (2012), “Research-based analysis of Youth in Action. Results from the surveys with project participants and project leaders in November 2010 and May 2011. Transnational analysis”, University of Innsbruck, available at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/69160332/RAY/RAY2011_report_20120905. pdf, accessed 5 September 2012.
Fennes H., Hagleitner W. and Helling K. (2011), “Research-based analysis of Youth in Action. Results from the frst series of surveys with project participants and project leaders between October 2009 and June 2010. Transnational analysis”, University of Innsbruck, available at, http://dl.dropbox.com/u/45733110/projects/ YiA/RAY/RAY_Transnational_Analysis_2010_doublepage.pdf, accessed 17 December 2011. Helling K. et al. (2011), “‘Youth in Action’. Access and competence development. Research-based analysis and monitoring of Youth in Action. Master Theses 2009/2010/2011”, University of Innsbruck, available at http://dl.dropbox. com/u/45733110/projects/YiA/JiA_Diplomarbeiten_2009_2011_Zusammenfassung_ en.pdf, accessed 31 October 2012.
What are the effects of international youth mobility projects?
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
II
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Concepts and approaches concerning mobility and learning
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Andreas Thimmel
International youth work in Germany
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
T
his chapter describes the practical and theoretical aspects of international youth work (IJA) in Germany, which started to develop in the 1950s and has diversifed since then. Parallel to practical work, an interdisciplinary discourse about theory and research has been established that is particularly oriented towards psychological exchange research (Thomas 1991; Thomas et al. 2007) and sociopedagogical research in youth work (Thimmel 2001; Friesenhahn and Thimmel 2005; Chehata et al. 2010). The division for International and European Youth Policies within the Ministry for Families, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (BMFSFJ) plays an important role as far as administration and conceptualisation are concerned. In 1988, a network was founded that encourages dialogue between researchers and practitioners in the realm of international youth work and that is a key platform to discuss new topics and realise research projects and practically relevant evaluations (Researchers’-Practitioners’-Dialogue International Youth Work – RPD, see www.forscher-praktiker-dialog.de). Important research in the feld of international youth work is being done at the Cologne University of Applied Sciences at the research centre of non-formal education (www.nonformalebildung.de).
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
74
The term “international youth work” has a wider and a narrower meaning. In the narrower meaning it refers to and addresses – as with the German term for youth work, “Jugendarbeit” – all adolescents and young adults. The aim is to support young people with the help of non-formal education and leisure activities, independent from other criteria such as social, economic and formal education. It is important that the participation happens voluntarily. Youth work supports adolescents on their way into a democratic society and helps to foster their personality. Youth work is internally split up in the felds of extracurricular education, work with youth organisations and open youth work. It is confusing that the term “international youth work” is also used for other aspects of social work with adolescents. And indeed, a wider meaning of the term “international youth work” refers to international activities in all realms of pedagogical and social work with adolescents. This includes social youth work, which helps to integrate structurally or individually disadvantaged adolescents into the employment market, as well as aid in education and upbringing, which promotes the development of adolescents living in units or hostels. Areas of co-operation are international vocational trainings, for example international internships, as well as school exchanges (as exchanges of individuals or groups). In many countries school exchanges are part of the youth work exchange discourse. One can distinguish four forms of international youth work: • group exchange or youth encounters; • collaboration of youth organisations; • volunteer work; • the exchange of professionals in the feld of youth work.
Youth exchanges and youth encounters are the forms that have been empirically examined and conceptually refected the most. Therefore the history, structure, conceptions, theoretical discourses and empirical research of youth encounters are at the centre of this contribution that analyses the exchange sponsored by public funds between youth groups from the Federal Republic of Germany and other countries. These are usually exchanges with EU countries, the Russian Federation, Turkey, Israel, China, Japan and the USA. The number of exchanges with north African as well as with Latin American countries has declined, but since 2012 there have been efforts to correct this political and strategic mistake and revive at least the exchanges with north African countries.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Basic understanding, structure, types of programmes Programmes can consist of bi-, tri- and multinational activities, and topic-oriented travels to foreign countries with a focus on encounters and work camps. Youth organisations, local youth work agencies, agencies and organisations for extracurricular education, agencies for political and cultural youth education, welfare associations and other non-proft organisations as well as organisations that specialise in international youth work are responsible for these activities. Due to funding guidelines it is usually the case that the visiting group invites the hosts in return. This applies to the group itself, not necessarily to the individual group members. The young adults live, study and work together in mixed cultural groups and also spend their leisure time together. “Together” can also mean that from time to time monolingual groups are formed to facilitate communication. Activities last between 7 and 21 days and often take place during summer breaks. Organisations, public youth work agencies or schools are partners in the visiting country. Adolescents from privileged social settings, students from universities as well as college students make up the largest proportion of participants.
Andreas Thimmel
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
9 75
For a few years now, efforts have been made in youth policy to integrate “nonprivileged” adolescents, students of all school types, trainees or unemployed young people into international youth work. This includes adolescents from migrant backgrounds who have so far rarely participated in activities of the non-formal sector and could be regarded as structurally disadvantaged (Chehata et al. 2010). The Federal Republic of Germany considers itself a social democracy. This selfunderstanding demands equal opportunities and participation in the “habits of internationality” for adolescents from all social and educational backgrounds. It is a central task in social, youth and educational politics to realise and fnance this ambition and explains why the infrastructures of international youth work are sponsored by public funds in Germany. Field reports and scientifc research prove that international youth work can only be successful and effective if reliable partnerships with partner organisations are established. Besides the appropriate management of the exchange itself, preparation and follow-up of the event, it is very important that adequate fnancing is available and that the volunteering, self-employed or full-employed team members have good qualifcations. International youth work builds on motivation and commitment, organisational talent and the composure of the participating persons. Sustainable international youth work can only be achieved by maintaining minimum standards of infrastructure and manpower in the general feld of youth work. Therefore, international youth work is always dependent on national youth work. International youth work is situated between the polarities of international cultural policy, collaboration in youth policy, political education as well as youth, leisure and Reisepädagogik. It has proved helpful to distinguish between youth education (micro-level), youth policy (meso-level) and foreign policy (macro-level). From an educational point of view the personal experiences of the participants, their exploration of identity in an international context as well as their interaction, communication and understanding with people from other nations are at the centre of international youth work. The political dimension is demonstrated by the collaboration between youth workers from different nations.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D The history of international youth work International youth work began in the post-war period in Germany (1945-1955). In the sense of democratic education it was a chance for German adolescents to get to know democracy and peaceful cohabitation after the war (international education). In the frst years of the young federal republic, international youth work was mainly motivated by reconciliation and reparation in view of the crimes of National Socialist Germany. This mainly took place with Western and not with Eastern European countries (Thimmel 2001). In the German Democratic Republic (GDR), in another political context, international camps and meetings with other Eastern European states were organised. In the 1960s, international youth work focused on the foreign policy perspective and relied on the naïve contact theory, which assumes that all adolescents are representatives of their states and international understanding can be reached just by meeting others face-to-face. No pedagogical conception or planning is needed; the visit itself and the photo at the mayor’s offce are evidence enough of good work. The tension between political motivation (macro-level) – for instance a contribution to international understanding – and the motivations of the young people involved (micro-level) – including their everyday and leisure time interests – increased.
International youth work in Germany
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
76
This dilemma was the starting point for empirical research in the feld of international youth work: at the beginning of the 1970s, the German Department for Youth commissioned a study called the “Breitenbach-Studie”. The key concept of this study is “intercultural learning”, that is the true interactions between participants from different countries become important and differences during the encounters are recognised as cultural or infuenced by culture. These “critical situations of interaction” demonstrate signifcant learning potential, and are indeed a topic of conversation during said encounters. Basic rules concerning group pedagogy as well as methods and didactics as formulated in the study remain valid today.
However, the success of intercultural learning also had its side-effects. When comparing the participating groups or countries the term “society” was uncritically replaced by “culture” which led to a non-refexive use of the word “nation”. For history-related reasons this is of special importance to the federal republic. The governments’ understanding of the term “nation” corresponded to its immigration, foreign and citizenship policy that construed Germany as a mono-cultural entity and denied multiculturalism as a reality in offcial documents. This changed only in 1999 with the red-green federal government. Since the 1990s, exchange with central and eastern European countries has been intensifed.
The offce YOUTH for Europe, the German National Agency for the EU Programme Youth in Action, receives more responsibilities while the EU is reinforcing its activities in the feld of youth policy (www.jugendfuereuropa.de). International youth work is always at risk of being exploited by political aims (Thimmel 2010). The core concepts which are important for the theory and research discourse of international youth work are presented below.22 Figure 1: The theoretical discourse and concepts of international youth work
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Cultural standards
Interculturality Development of identity
Empathy
Intercultural learning difference in everyday life
Information and contact International understanding
Key terms
“understanding what cannot be understood”
International learning subject
Europe Tolerance
22. This contribution updates the author’s discourse analysis from 2001, see Thimmel 2001, pp. 118 ff.
Andreas Thimmel
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
9 77
Information and communication: country-specifc concepts Culture, language, history, politics, geography, the customs and traditions of a country, and the experience of getting to know young people from different nations are at the centre of many country-specifc concepts in international youth work. For historical, politico-fnancial and pragmatic reasons these contexts continue to play a primary role. The starting point is the idea that the acquisition and expansion of relevant knowledge about contemporary history and current events is important, in addition to information about the history, politics, society and relationships between the two countries involved. The respective educational, social and youth systems, as well as the personal encounters between people from other cultures and countries, are at the centre of intercultural learning and successful communication. This is valid for individuals, groups and institutions, and for the nation states involved.
Intercultural learning concept Team members were asked to assess whether a respective situation is benefcial or not for the intercultural process, and if situations can be structured by pedagogic impulses. Basic methodical knowledge from extracurricular youth work, leisure time, event and group pedagogy, and their individual transfer to the international context are prerequisites for a successful education and learning process. This has important consequences for linguistic motivation and “free time”, which is itself an important item on the agenda. This means the entire educational arrangement, that is accommodation, organisation, provisioning, well-being, travelling, leisuretime activities, touristy and shopping needs, is taken seriously and methodically considered as a possible learning situation. Psychological exchange research: cultural standards and long-term effects on personality
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Psychological exchange research has a big infuence on the conceptual development of international youth work. For effcient and successful communication, knowledge and predictions about the actions of the individuals involved in the process of intercultural communication need to be studied and analysed (Thomas 1991).
In the Regensburg study “Long-term effects of participation in international youth encounters”, Alexander Thomas and his team analysed the long-term effects of short-term exchange programmes. From a retrospective inquiry of former participants (10 years after the event) different domains of long-term effects were determined. These were especially verifable in the areas of self-centred qualities and competences, open-mindedness, fexibility, composure, social competency, foreign languages and intercultural learning (compare Thomas et al. 2006). The fndings of the study were adapted to practical work and accepted in the discourse about youth policies as a clear argument for the positive effects of international youth on personality development. Hermeneutical and psycho-analytical concepts The term “intercultural learning” is at the centre of the pedagogical approach that has been used by German and French researchers since the 1980s. With regard to these concepts the orientation along diversities and differences on the level of national affliations as well as the use of methods for qualitative research is important. “Giving space to differences” and “understanding the not understandable”
International youth work in Germany
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
78
are important basic premises. International youth work offers “forms or moulds in which the research processes can be promoted” (Guist-Desprairies and Müller 1997). This concept has been the only bi-national concept in international youth work in Germany so far. Diversity-conscious international youth work In the 1990s, the term “international learning” became part of the discourse. The political and economical dimension was brought into focus, the connection with anti-racist concepts was demonstrated and the danger of culturalisation in pedagogical contexts was analysed and underlined. The study by Anne Winkelmann (2006), which relates international youth work to the “pedagogy of the immigrant society”, belongs in this context. She underlines the concept of differences and describes what is needed to promote international youth work in the context of globalisation, modernism and migration. Since 2011, strong attempts have been made to implement the diversity-conscious perspective into the realities of international youth work. This shows many parallels with the concept of “refexive internationality” that is supported by the author and presented in the section on social pedagogy below. Refexive identity and political education
In 1990, the political scientist Norbert Ropers discussed the topic of “national identity” and criticised the often inadequate use of group-related identity constructions in which the terms “nation” and “German society” were equated with each other. He extended the self-conception of the federal republic in view of a multicultural society and Europe (Ropers 1991). Later, his thoughts were linked with migration researchers’ critical discourse about identity (Hamburger 2009) and the pluralistic understanding of the German republic in political science, and the author transferred this to the feld of international youth work (Thimmel 2001).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
An extensive practice-oriented research project (Chehata et al. 2010) conceptually embeds the heterogeneity of the federal republic’s society in the discourse of international youth work and establishes it in practical discourse. Further political questions arise, for example, when it comes to international youth work with countries in which democracy and human rights are oppressed, or when it comes to dilemmas that occur when topics that are off-limits in the political discourse of the other country are discussed within the framework of hospitality and courtesy in communication (Thimmel 2010). Research in social pedagogy: evaluation/interculturalism
Since 2000, international youth work has been promoted by the academics Friesenhahn (Koblenz) and Thimmel (Köln). The aim was to connect international youth work with research in youth work in general, taking into consideration the young persons’ self-understanding and sense of life as well as the topic of adolescence. International youth work was designed as a relevant feld for nonformal education opportunities, linked to the educational discourse in youth work (Thimmel and Friesenhahn 2005) and embedded in the discourse of European social work (Friesenhahn and Kniephoff-Knebel 2011). Two research projects are outlined below.
In a practice-oriented, independent evaluation project, researchers and practitioners developed a multilingual self-evaluation tool for the German-French and German-
Andreas Thimmel
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
9 79
Polish exchanges. This tool has improved quality of research and practice in a decisive way. The study shows the high educational level of the activities, the huge importance of the team members for the learning processes and the relevance of minimum standards for organisation and fnancing as well as basic rules for methods and didactics and group pedagogy (www.camp-evaluation.de). This network and evaluation system is open to all organisations.
The differentiated relation between the intercultural (migration) and the international perspective was evaluated in the extensive practical research project InterKulturell on Tour (compare Chehata et al. 2010). The study underlines how important the differentiated usage of terms and concepts is for the German discourse about migration and immigration (compare Hamburger 2009). Generally, in youth work the right of the adolescents to self-defnition is to accept, meaning the freedom to decide, based on the situation, whether their “individual migrant background” is relevant (in the respective context) or not. The study states that in international youth work diversity and differences have a positive connotation. The international experiences trigger an educational process that is mainly characterised by the change of perspectives and by refection. As educational settings, youth encounters bear a lot of staging elements and sensitive moments that offer the adolescents possibilities for individual and political discussions. In the feld of international youth work, for example, the adolescents act (consciously) as German representatives which can strengthen a feeling of affnity that goes beyond the individual level. This form of “representation” can encourage adolescents to engage with their own country and possibly also its social and political conditions (also in the sense of the migration society). The discussion can also take place in the form of “self-narration”, meaning that the adolescents tell their foreign friends about their everyday life and its economical, social and political realities (Chehata et al. 2010). More research is needed to fnd out how this area of learning can be used for selfeducation processes in the sense of discussing a construed “collective identity” in the everyday reality of international youth work.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Perspective This practical and theoretical feld is characterised by the mutual reference of everyday situations, youth policy, practical research, and the development of concepts and theories. From the perspective of youth policies the feld offers extraordinary possibilities in education, learning and leisure time. From a scientifc point of view the different strands of psychology, educational theory, youth work and political education need to be related more closely to each other frst. Second, the separate country-related research projects need to concentrate on the entire feld of international youth work. Third, research needs to be carried out in the areas of specialist exchange, student exchange, youth political collaboration and voluntary services. Fourth, studies of bi- and multinational research groups are necessary to fnally fulfl the demand for international research work. Fifth, exchanges via media like the Internet and Web 2.0 need to be embedded more frmly into the practice of international youth work.
D References Breitenbach D. (ed.) (1979), Kommunikationsbarrieren in der Internationalen Jugendarbeit. Ein Forschungsprojekt im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Jugend, Familie und Gesundheit, Bd. 1-5, Breitenbach, Saarbrücken.
International youth work in Germany
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
80
Chehata Y., Riß K. and Thimmel A. (2010), Vielfalt on tour – Internationale Jugendbegegnungen in der Migrationsgesellschaft. Abschlussbericht des Modellprojektes InterKulturell on Tour, available at www.jive-international.de/ downloads/4-20-1821/JiVE_IKT_Bericht_wissenschaftliche_ Begleitung.pdf, accessed 1 February 2013. Friesenhahn G. J. and Kniephoff-Knebel A. (2011), Europäische Dimensionen Sozialer Arbeit, Wochenschau, Schwalbach/Ts.
Friesenhahn G. J. and Thimmel A. (eds) (2005), Schlüsseltexte. Engagement und Kompetenz in der internationalen Jugendarbeit. Texte aus 50 Jahren Praxis- und Theoriediskurs. Dokumentiert und neu kommentiert, Wochenschau, Schwalbach/Ts. Giust-Desprairies F., Müller B. and Barbier R. (eds) (1997), Im Spiegel der Anderen. Selbstbildung in der internationalen Begegnung, Leske u. Budrich, Opladen.
Hamburger F. (2009), Abschied von der Interkulturellen Pädagogik. Plädoyer für einen Wandel sozialpädagogischer Konzepte, Juventa, Weinheim. IJAB – Fachstelle für Internationale Jugendarbeit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. (eds) (2012), Forum Jugendarbeit International 2011/2012. Internationale Jugendarbeit und ihre Bildungswirkungen, IJAB, Bonn. Ilg W. and Dubiski J. (2011), Begegnung schafft Perspektiven. Empirische Einblicke in internationale Jugendbegegnungen, Deutsch-Französisches Jugendwerk und Deutsch-Polnisches Jugendwerk, Berlin/Potsdam/Paris/Warschau.
Nicklas H., Müller B. and Kordes H. (eds) (2006), Interkulturell denken und handeln. Theoretische Grundlagen und gesellschaftliche Praxis, Campus, Frankfurt a. M. Ropers N. (1991), “Die Bedeutung der nationalen Identität im Jugendaustausch”, in Alexander T. (ed.) Kulturstandards in der Internationalen Begegnung, SSIP Bulletin No. 61, Verlagbreitenbach, Saarbrücke/Fort Lauderdale.
Thimmel A. (2001), Pädagogik der internationalen Jugendarbeit, Geschichte, Praxis und Konzepte Interkulturellen Lernens, Wochenschau, Schwalbach/Ts.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Thimmel A. (2010), Internationale Jugendarbeit und Politische Bildung, in Lösch B. and Thimmel A. (eds), Handbuch kritische politische Bildung, Wochenschau, Schwalbach/Ts. pp. 497-508. Thomas A. (ed.) (1991), “Kulturstandards in der Internationalen Begegnung”, SSIPBulletin No. 61, Breitenbach, Saarbrücken. Thomas A., Chang C. and Abt H. (2007), Erlebnisse, die verändern – Langzeitwirkungen der Teilnahme an internationalen Jugendbegegnungen, Vandenhoeck u. Ruprecht, Göttingen.
Winkelmann A. (2006), Internationale Jugendarbeit in der Einwanderungsgesellschaft. Auf dem Weg zu einer theoretischen Fundierung, Wochenschau, Schwalbach/Ts.
Andreas Thimmel
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Günter J. Friesenhahn
A comparative framework for youth mobility D Introduction
S
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
tarting with “Youth for Europe” in 1988, the EU has launched a multitude of programmes in in order to enhance the cross-border mobility of young people. Many different actors in the youth feld have implemented international activities for young people, often around the topics of intercultural learning, mutual understanding, participation and European citizenship. In a nutshell, these aims are described in the Proposal for the Council Recommendation Youth on the move – promoting the learning mobility of young people (15 September 2010): One of the key action lines in the Youth on the Move initiative is to support the development of transnational learning mobility for young people. Learning mobility is an important way in which young people can strengthen their future employability and acquire new professional competences, while enhancing their development as active citizens. It helps them to access new knowledge and develop new linguistic and intercultural competences. Europeans who are mobile as young learners are more likely to be mobile as workers later in life. Employers recognise and value these benefts. Learning mobility has also played an important role in making education and training systems and institutions more open, more European and international, more accessible and more effcient (European Commission 2010).
0
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
82
Nowadays, key points in these programmes are employability, empowerment, and validation and recognition of competences gained in non-formal learning settings. It becomes evident that the intensifcation of contacts between youth organisations, non-governmental organisations and individuals has led to a process of multiple means of European co-operation and, thus, to one of refection on the nature of the diversity which characterises the social and youth services and the professions related to these felds in Europe.
Furthermore, it demonstrates that the constructive debate on the varying theoretical, methodical and social policy traditions and contexts of youth work in Europe has considerable potential for future development in this feld. The practice of youth work is characterised by a growing number of different felds each of which – from a scientifc point of view – requires a basis in theory and scientifc enquiry and a greater reliance on research to widen the theoretical base and to improve practice. This logic of scientifc disciplines, derived from the classical enlightenment ideal of scientifc endeavour, fnds itself increasingly in confict with a utilitarian notion of education which mainly emphasises employability. The European context accentuates the complexity as different intellectual traditions can be drawn upon for the development of concepts and forms of practice in youth work. This impacts on the achieved and yet to be achieved degree of professionalisation in the youth feld (Friesenhahn et al. 2011). There are a number of different ways to approach youth and initiate youth work. Young people’s lives can be constructed and understood in a variety of ways with respect to social and scientifc aspects. In the European context complexity increases with the use of different schools of thought to describe different approaches and the practice of youth work. Depending on what perspective youth work is regarded from, different images, requirements and demands arise (Chisholm and Kocheva 2002). This makes a clear identifcation of (international) youth work as a research object base very diffcult, pointing to the necessity of providing tools for a comparative analysis.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Comparison Comparing is an everyday activity. We compare circumstances, processes, people and things. Often this is done without any refection. Scientifcally speaking we must bear in mind, though, what we do and why we do it when we compare, for example, the situation of young people in a certain country or different theoretical approaches or educational concepts. Scientifc comparisons are structured and methodologically distinguished. The following reasoning for the relevance of international comparisons can be used (Schweppe and Hirschler 2007) for example for social work and it is surely also relevant for international youth work: • foreign countries as role models or stimulation: when the pioneering role is attributed to a country in a specifc area (for example upbringing in orphanages, community work or youth projects); • country surveys based on literature: for example, what impact employment programmes have on certain groups of individuals in different countries; • systematically comparative (empiric) studies: if, for example, a topic such as the values of adolescents or social help systems are compared, as in the European Youth Report.
Günter J. Friesenhahn
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
10 83
Comparing is thinking in relation. A reference ratio is created between two or more phenomena from the professional horizon of a feld of action resulting in: • equality (congruence); • similarity (affnity); • diversity (difference).
This requires refection since it is about rectifying “false comparisons”, avoiding inappropriate conclusions by analogy and analysing the conditions for a re-evaluation of facts. Basically, there are two distinct features of a comparison, pragmatic and analytical. In the frst kind of comparison, alternative forms of practice can be recognised through comparison and they can provide innovative clues to improve one’s own performance. With respect to the practical dimension of comparable work we can ask, for example: how does youth work function in other countries, what solutions does the system use for a social problem or a practical example? Is it more effective than solutions used by other systems?
Analytical comparisons force us to foster a critical examination of our own theory and practice, thus providing the opportunity to gain a new perspective. This is about decrypting the different contexts of origin and effect of youth work in Europe and analysing the impacts of current changes in different social welfare systems on the basis of disciplines and professional developments and experiences. The goal is to analyse those conditions and relationships that foster international youth work in general but also to fnd opportunities and limits to diversify these conditions. Tools
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Gaining insights through methodical comparison is to be expected with comparability in place. This has nothing to do with a stringing together of individual phenomena and facts in summary. One should also include the context, which indicates the signifcance of organisations, institutions and individual educational measures and actions (Pfaffenberger 1981). To get an idea of the relevant issues and defne the scope of the research the multilevel model of Treptow may be used (2006). Treptow poses the question about central comparison levels that should be taken into account when a comparison is drawn und also suggests three levels for structuring. His model differentiates between the micro-level of coping with everyday life in the close environment of protagonists, the meso-level of existing social services/organisations and the macro-level of the individual welfare regime. Table 1: Multi-level model of comparison Macro
Society structure Welfare regime
Meso
Social services Educational system
Micro
Coping with everyday life Needs of target groups/users
Source: Treptow 2006
A comparative framework for youth mobility
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
84
At the macro-level, different welfare models can for example be correlated with each other, or selected individual sub-systems (educational system, systems of social security, socio-political system, legal system, etc.) can be viewed from a comparative perspective. A well-known example on this level is the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) study of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. At the meso-level, the specifc structure of social services (structure and provider) in different countries might be compared. An example would be the research on international youth welfare (Homfeld and Brandhorst 2005; Knuth 2008).
The micro-level is about the target group of youth work and their needs and different ways of coping within the national framework conditions which have also been predefned at the macro- and meso-level. The initial point of such a comparative study could be the debate about an actual case or a social problem: how are minor refugees to be treated in the different countries and what mission does this imply for youth and social work? What is to be done and where to turn if someone wants to do an apprenticeship anywhere in Europe? The following method of comparison is based on current models from various scientifc disciplines. It provides – with reservations – the possibility to systematically establish comparatively laid-out functions and to expose presumptions and comparative steps in a clear and understandable manner (Friesenhahn and Kniephoff-Knebel 2011).
Table 2: Multi-stage model of comparison 5th stage Interpretation of contextual requirements in terms of the object base of comparison, assessment of comparison results in terms of questioning = actual comparison 4th stage Confrontation and systematisation of data, commonalities and differences: Juxtaposition 3rd stage Collecting country-specifc data and facts: Evaluation of a situation and description 2nd stage Selection of relevant categories of comparison based on the issue 1st stage Identifcation of the object base of comparison and understanding the issue Source: Friesenhahn and Kniephoff-Knebel 2011
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Object base A crucial factor in a comparison is a tertium comparationis. This term is used to describe a reference system respective to a benchmark, from where or to which the explicit comparison is applied. The aim is to ensure that only comparable items are compared with each other.
The initial point of comparable research is primarily the defnition of the object base of comparison and the central question: What exactly do I wish to compare? Objects of comparison can be, for example: • the historical development of (international) youth work; • the role of social actors in this feld; • the embedding in the social system and welfare policy;
Günter J. Friesenhahn
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
10 85
• traditional and new providers of mobility programmes; • levels of professionalisation and educational opportunities; • legal frameworks, professional identities and the professional ethics of youth work; • problems and challenges that professionals have to face, methods used, scientifc concepts; • success criteria for effective work.
Transfer to learning mobility Stage 1: Subject – What is meant by international youth work? International youth work is an independent area of practice and discourse of youth work in the Federal Republic of Germany. Pedagogically initiated mobility activities for children and young people for a limited period of time in an international context constitute the object base of international youth work.
International youth work constitutes itself in specifed mobility dimensions that have evolved from history and it refers to organisations and networks in other countries. It includes activities in a non-formal learning area. One can distinguish between bi- and multinational activities. Key sectors are youth exchange, voluntary services and programmes for professionals. As a cross-sectional area, international youth work affects – in Germany – all areas of children and youth welfare with the responsibility of promoting adolescents and young adults in their own personal development as well as fostering intercultural experience and, thus, encouraging a constructive impact on community development (Friesenhahn and Thimmel 2005; Friesenhahn 2006, Thimmel 2011).
Stage 2: Relevant categories of comparison – What categories can help to make my subject (international youth work) comparable at all?
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
On the one hand, this step clearly defnes what is compared and in what sphere or in what area the comparison is to be undertaken (Allemann-Ghionda 2004). On the other hand, those issues are determined that are used to fne-tune the defnition of the object base of comparison. The goal is to pre-structure the examined subject with the help of certain categories and dimensions to allow for a comparison and subsequent reference on this basis. The choice of categories of comparison is done according to their relevance with respect to the general aim of the comparison in view of the thirst for knowledge. Upon implementation of the EU youth strategy (http://ec.europa.eu/youth/news/ news1458_en.htm), one could focus on things like: • administrative implementation; • available resources; • participation opportunities of addressees; • what is made possible or prevented by this programme?
Stage 3: Data and facts – What (country-) specifc current and historical data and facts are in place with reference to the subject of comparison? This descriptive phase is about collecting relevant (previous) knowledge and data by using literature or relevant studies on both the intra-cultural context as well as the context of foreign cultures and supplementing this through feld trips
A comparative framework for youth mobility
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
86
to the area examined. It is extremely important to distinguish between the individual sources of data. Do these facts and data originate from offcial reports or principles that throw light on an issue against the backdrop of rhetoric in terms of social or educational policy or are the statements of practitioners or other protagonists based on their own practical experience? Solely on the basis of a detailed description the researcher may be able to carry out the subsequent step of evaluation and assessment of data. Stage 4: Juxtaposition Ð How are matters of common ground and differences arranged in line?
As a precondition of the actual comparison, this step is about the systematisation of data collected by clustering and contrasting in view of the selected category of comparison (e.g. legal framework requirements of international youth work). This is called juxtaposition and means the parallel listing and placing in line of categories, without however commenting on their relationship. Only a clear defnition (description) and subsequent comparison (juxtaposition) makes it possible to move on to the next step in the comparison process: the categories are put in relation to each other allowing a true comparison which means the evaluation and interpretation, that is the positioning of data in the context of the individual social system.
Stage 5: The actual comparison Ð How can commonalities and differences be visualised, interpreted and explained? In this step hypotheses are verifed or falsifed, results are substantiated and – based on the tertium comparationis previously determined – will get to the heart of the matter.
The categories that are to be compared have now been put in correlation with each other and subsequently their integration in the respective requirements of the original context must be construed and assessed according to the initial questioning. This step of clarifcation and interpretation of subjects of comparison in the respective original context (contextualisation) is certainly one of the most diffcult steps in the comparison process and requires an appropriate in-depth knowledge of the individual meaning and assessment of social phenomena and cultural aspects in view of the object base of comparison.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Essential requirements
Contextualisation is one of the central elements in comparative research. The things that have to do with practice and research in the feld of youth work and the answers that have been developed in this regard do not depend on location, time or culture. They have developed from history, were created by society and have been handed down traditionally. The goal is to describe the categories of comparison not only in their manifestation but to relate them to a specifc context and to trace the meanings that they have been subjected to within this context. This is the key factor since it is the only way to understand why certain phenomena within a certain context have taken a certain shape, why they run smoothly in a certain context and why they make sense in that situation. In many cases their meanings do not become clearly visible on the surface of the issues considered but are hidden beneath the phenomena visible on the surface. They need to be unveiled by means of reconstruction and
Günter J. Friesenhahn
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
10 87
interpretation. These are the key elements for the gentle translation of symbolisations in view of their underlying patterns and signifcances of social occurrences and processes (Schweppe 2005). It is about the refexive approach of cultural and disciplinary facts that are self-evident. In addition to specifc expertise, knowledge of foreign languages and intercultural competences are required for a comparison process in an international context. Tracing the individual peculiarity and vigorousness of the examined phenomena requires a substantial restraint of previous knowledge and presumption, in order to let the subject speak for itself and not to look at it from the perspective of what has already been learnt, what is familiar and what has been supposedly understood. It requires the disclosure of the individual subject by keeping a critical distance to oneself and not diminishing it by the narrowness of one’s own point of view and by subsuming it accordingly.
Hence, comparisons are never value-free. In addition to demonstrating the commonalities and differences in view of international youth work in different countries, the question arises, how results that have been brought to light can be embedded in individual, national or regional argumentative patterns. Comparison as such is not detached from the interest of knowledge, which in turn corresponds to certain scientifc approaches and political debates and strategies.
D References Allemann-Ghionda C. (2004), Einführung in die vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft, Beltz, Weinheim und Basel.
Chisholm L. and Kocheva S. (2002), Exploring the European youth mosaic, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. European Commission (2010), Proposal for a Council recommendation. Youth on the move – promoting the mobility of young people, COM (2010), 478 fnal, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/yom/rec_en.pdf, accessed 1 December 2012. Friesenhahn G. J. (ed.) (2006), Praxishandbuch internationale Jugendarbeit, Wochenschau Verlag, Schwalbach.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Friesenhahn G. J. and Thimmel A. (2005), Schlüsseltexte. Engagement und Kompetenz in der internationalen Jugendarbeit, Wochenschau Verlag, Schwalbach. Friesenhahn G. J. and Kniephoff-Knebel A. (2011), Europäische Dimensionen Sozialer Arbeit, Wochenschau Verlag, Schwalbach.
Friesenhahn G. J. et al. (2011), “Introduction”, Seibel F. W. et al. (eds), European Developments and the Social Professions, Albert, Boskovize, pp. 9-17.
Homfeld H. G., and Walser V. (2004), “Vergleichen – Facetten zu einer sozialpädagogischen Komparatistik”, Homfeld H. G. and Brandhorst K. (eds), International vergleichende Soziale Arbeit, Schneider Verlag, Hohengehren, pp. 196-218.
Knuth N. (2008), Fremdplatzierungspolitiken. Das System der stationären Jugendhilfe im deutsch-englischen Vergleich, Juventa, Munich.
A comparative framework for youth mobility
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
88
Pfaffenberger H. (1981), “Grundfragen und Basisthesen einer sozialpädagogischen Komparatistik”, Keil S. et al. (eds), Studienreform und Handlungskompetenz im außerschulischen Erziehungs- und Sozialwesen, Luchterhand, Neuwied, pp. 131-5. Schweppe C. (2005), “Internationalität als Erkenntnispotential in der Sozialen Arbeit”, Neue Praxis 6/2005, pp. 575-86.
Schweppe C. and Hirschler S. (2007), “Internationalität und Soziale Arbeit – Eine Bilanz”, Sozialwissenschaftliche Literaturrundschau, 2/07 SLR 55, pp. 113-27. Thimmel A. (2011), “Internationale Jugendarbeit”, Rauschenbach T. et al. (eds), Erziehungswissenschaftliches Lexikon, Weinheim, Beltz.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Treptow R. (2006), “Zwischen internationaler Projektkooperation und systematischem Vergleich. Eine Skizze zu Aufgaben und Problemen einer Komparatistik Sozialer Arbeit”, Sozialmagazin, 10/2006, pp. 22-6.
Günter J. Friesenhahn
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
David Cairns
Preconditions for movement in Portugal and Ireland: social inequality, mobility feld and habitus D Introduction
U
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
nderstanding youth mobility involves combining a number of different perspectives. For policy makers and youth workers, there is a need to evaluate the effectiveness of institutionally mediated mobility programmes such as Erasmus (see Teichler 1996; MurphyLejeune 2002; Maiworm 2002; King and Ruiz-Gelices 2003), while for researchers the emphasis is more on quantifying levels of movement abroad and understanding mobility decision making (King et al. 2011; Findlay et al. 2012). This chapter aims to use recent research to inform youth policy makers and practitioners about how and why mobility choices are made, in effect, constituting a form of knowledge transfer. The central issue here is mobility decision making, concentrating on students at tertiary level institutions, with evidence drawn from recent research conducted across Ireland and in Portugal. Theoretically, this chapter utilises concepts associated with French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, including the idea of “habitus”, in an attempt to explain what encourages and/or inhibits contemplating transnational mobility for the next stage in an educational or occupational trajectory. This approach hence takes into
1
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
90
account not only the obvious potential opened up by the removal of political barriers at a macro (political) level, but also less evident micro (personal) level factors, most prominently the role of the family to mobility choices via the informal learning of values towards mobility. Furthermore, given the unequal distribution of social and economic resources between families, the question will also be asked as to whether this informal learning process has the potential to generate and/or perpetuate inequality among youth, particularly in the context of the present economic crisis.
D Theoretical and empirical background It is already well known that transnational movement can be important for young people in terms of their educational, occupational and personal development (see, for example, King and Ruis-Gelices 2003; Thomson and Taylor 2005; Findlay et al. 2006; Rivza and Teichler 2007); it is also clear from this work that to be mobile is the exception rather than the rule. That such movement can be of strategic importance to attaining a high level of academic success and accessing relatively prestigious career outcomes is however often recognised by certain families, with youth mobility traditionally viewed as a privileged site, with access restricted to a social and economic resource-rich “migratory elite” (Murphy-Lejeune 2002). The extent to which this is still the case among contemporary European youth remains to be seen.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
To help account for differentials in mobility take-up the present discussion draws upon pertinent theoretical ideas and recent empirical evidence. In regard to the former, particular emphasis is placed upon the importance of habitus, a concept commonly associated with Pierre Bourdieu, in respect to enabling and disabling access to the “mobility feld”; in this context, “mobility feld” refers to the capacity to follow educational and work opportunities outside one’s present country of residence. This means that rather than viewing transnational movement for work or study as the (passive) outcome of the existence of an international structure of opportunities within Europe, emphasis is placed upon the (active if latent) socially mediated means through which mobility plans are made. Certain ingrained actions come to appear as natural choices, perhaps without even the actor’s realisation, and act as “structuring dispositions” (Bourdieu 1990); learning mobility is hence viewed here as an informal process that may entail an inculcation of values emphasising the importance of moving abroad to success in education and the labour market. This perspective has been developed in prior research conducted by the author, which has revealed that parents can encourage their children to migrate as a means of maintaining a family’s social class position (Cairns 2008; Cairns and Smyth 2011). But the same research has also found that a resource-poor family can negate the possibility of being mobile through creating dependency upon highly localised home-based resources, even where a move abroad is recognised as being in a young person’s own interest (Cairns and Growiec 2011). The present context considers both these scenarios, thus broadening the discussion of habitus to both mobility and immobility.
D Research contexts and methodology The discussion that follows concentrates upon two different European contexts, Portugal and Ireland (including both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland). While both have their own social, economic and political specifcities, these regions share at present the unfortunate distinction of being in a state of economic crisis, Northern Ireland being, nominally, an exception due to its link with the United Kingdom. Both quantitative and qualitative research was conducted in these areas, with respondents drawn from third-level educational institutions. In Ireland, feldwork was conducted
David Cairns
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
11 91
at six different universities in Belfast, Dublin and Cork between January and April of 2010. This choice of locations was intended both to incorporate social and political diversity into the sample and include different geographical contexts. The Portuguese feldwork meanwhile was conducted entirely at universities in the capital city of Lisbon between September and December of 2011. In each of the two regions, a quantitative survey was conducted, with samples of 400 students at ISCED level 5 drawn from various university faculties, following gender and feld of study parameters in each locale from respective national statistics agencies. While not intended as a comparative research project, these samples were generally representative of their undergraduate student cohorts, although not of their national youth populations. The quantitative survey acted not only as a source of data but also as a sampling frame for follow-up interviews, all of which were conducted, translated and transcribed by the author. A total of 40 case study interviews were conducted in Ireland and 12 in Portugal, with the selection of interviewees proportionately following trends from analyses of data.
D Discussion of results
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Given the brevity of this chapter, there is not suffcient space for a full elaboration of either the quantitative or qualitative results; rather, a case study approach will be adopted to illustrate different habitus/mobility scenarios (for a full discussion of results, see Cairns 2012; Cairns et al. 2012a, Cairns et al. 2012b; Cairns and Growiec forthcoming). But to summarise the main fndings, in Ireland, the majority of the 400 undergraduate students surveyed (62%) had plans to move abroad following the completion of their present course of study, predominantly to English-speaking destinations. Such plans were more prevalent in the Republic of Ireland (72%) than in Northern Ireland (52%), refecting the greater impact of the global economic crisis in the former region. In regard to why those with mobility intentions sought to move, parental occupational background and locality were of particular importance, with those from well-off families and living in urban areas most likely to be contemplating an exit. Correspondingly, those rurally based and from less well-off backgrounds were least likely to have such plans. The results of the Portuguese research found that 72% of respondents had intentions to move abroad, largely for educational reasons; the main objective was to pursue postgraduate educational courses in foreign universities, followed by an immediate return to Portugal. While there were no signifcant age, gender or social class differentials in respect to mobility decision making, an important factor here was the impact being made by the economic crisis, particularly upon personal well-being, with those feeling the strain of living under the yoke of austerity signifcantly more likely to be considering moving abroad. A further observation worth remarking upon is the character of mobility sought by the respondents in both areas, which was essentially informal, at least in the sense of being individually as opposed to being institutionally driven; no one surveyed had participated in an Erasmus exchange or had plans to do so, although a few expressed an interest in voluntary work abroad. Polite views were, however, expressed towards Erasmus, but with two major criticisms voiced: frstly, fnancial support is not suffcient to cover all costs; secondly, and bearing in mind that respondents were usually midway through their degree courses, undertaking mobility within a tertiary education programme as opposed to following the completion of an educational stage is not viable, since such an action may have a negative impact upon educational development due to lost ground and missed opportunities at home. The additional implication here is of course that Erasmus is not being perceived as a path to further, perhaps more substantive movement, but rather as a one-off short-term mobility event.
Preconditions for movement in Portugal and Ireland
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
92
In both research locales, the family and to a lesser extent peers played an extremely important role in mobility decision making, more so than, say, educational professionals or peers, who were rarely cited as sources of information or as mobility role models. To illustrate how the family infuences mobility, the following case studies have been extracted, covering both regional contexts and different mobility scenarios.
Ireland Among the case studies gathered in the course of the Irish research, there was considerable diversity in terms of infuences upon mobility choices, but it was possible to locate examples of young people following a parental example. This scenario is illustrated by Helen, a 21-year-old Physics student from Belfast. In regard to her family circumstances, Helen is relatively well off and her parents have been mobile within their own career trajectories. They are now encouraging their daughter to do the same: I have a lot of resources myself so that I’m able to travel. So those kind of fnancial reasons would never be a reason for me not to travel, especially just because of my family, and their love of travelling.
It is also notable that the recent recession has not played a part in Helen’s plans: her mobility intentions were in place before the economic crisis and have not changed. A similar situation can be observed with Celia, a 21-year-old design student from near Dublin. Celia is also from a comfortable family background, with parents who have a long history of mobility in their own lives. This means that not only is Celia “habituated” to the idea of being mobile in her own life, but she also has the practical value of transnational movement:
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Yes, my family is from Ireland but I was actually raised in London, because both my parents went to college in London. And they studied there because they thought that it would be a more benefcial education, and then they got better work over there. The reason we moved back to Dublin was because the lower secondary school education in a place like London isn’t very good and it’s better here. So we moved over, just for those few years and basically, ever since we moved here I’ve known that I was gonna go back.
A combination of work and educational factors has thus infuenced her family’s choices; they have made the best use of the available opportunities in different countries. This spatially attuned approach to planning has evidently been passed on to Celia, who has realised that while Dublin might have been a good place in which to study, London is a better place in which to work.
Both these cases clearly illustrate the role that a family plays in infuencing mobility choices in a positive manner, but at the other extreme, we can fnd young people like Trevor, a 19-year-old arts student from a working class district of Belfast. When asked about the possibility of leaving Northern Ireland, Trevor stated that while he appreciates the potential value of such a move it would not be for him: Well I think that it’s a good thing for students to get to travel to another country but I wouldn’t want to go there myself. It would be too hard to leave behind all my family, who are all here.
David Cairns
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
11 93
For Trevor, this valorisation of family helps explain the dichotomy between holding a positive view of mobility but failing to make, or feeling unable to make, any actual movement. Living within a family or community defned by its local character means that it feels necessary to stay there, and this is a belief which is stronger than his fears over the impact of the fnancial crisis in Belfast. This was a widespread phenomenon, in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, and it is apparent that those who might have benefted most from a move can be among those least likely to be actually planning to do so. Portugal In regard to those with plans to leave Portugal, two prominent scenarios could be observed, both of which share a familial dimension. The frst relates to relatively well-off families encouraging mobility as a means of personal and professional development. This is exemplifed by the case of Inês, an 18-year-old human resources management student from Lisbon. An optimistic and level-headed young woman, Inês was highly confdent about her future job prospects in Portugal, since her feld of study had been chosen due to the stability offered by educational credentials in this area. She also admits that she has enjoyed generous support from her family while studying, and she expects this to continue throughout the remainder of her studies. But despite her high level of contentment, and perhaps comfort, Inês nevertheless has plans to be mobile: It’s a question of personal development. To gain more experience: that is totally different. Without doubt, I would consider geographical mobility for studying, at other qualifcation levels, all for the experience. It would be fantastic. But not permanently. I like a lot the United States, and Japan. Places that are totally out of the comfort zone. Places as different as they could be. Japan is the other side of the world. Totally different.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Her family, who we have noted are presently supporting her while at university, also support her mobility plans, being aware of how foreign experience can enhance career chances at home. This scenario, of mobility as a form of cementing an already strong social and economic position, was common among interviewees from well-off families in Portugal to the extent of being the norm. It was however also notable that short-term mobility, particularly for study at elite universities, is supported by both emotional and fnancial incentives on the proviso that there will be a relatively quick return made to Portugal where this newly acquired educational capital can be used to gain a labour market advantage, thus mitigating fears of a permanent exit.
The second, and less common, Portuguese scenario is more concerned with movement due to familial social and economic constraints associated with the present economic crisis. This can be illustrated by the case of Isabel, a 22-year-old social sciences student, in the last year of her present course of study in Lisbon. Both Isabel and her family recognise the necessity of leaving Portugal due to the damage being wrought by the government’s austerity measures upon both her own social life and familial fnancial situation; both her parents have suffered severe salary cuts, being employees of a state-owned business. The message from her family to move is clear, and being in her fnal year Isabel has in fact already made plans: I am thinking about France, and maybe Germany. I already know the language there. I’m thinking about doing another professional degree. One more year. I don’t know where [which university] I would go to study yet. I don’t know. I have some preferences but I don’t have a direction. I don’t have any experience of living abroad either. [I will go for] one year. One year and then I am going to return. Then maybe things will be better? I don’t know.
Preconditions for movement in Portugal and Ireland
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
94
We can thus see that in families where there is a real decline in economic condition, and no expectation of an imminent return to prosperity in Portugal, moving abroad has become an attractive proposition, even where this is not necessarily what young people themselves desire.
D Discussion If the aim of this collection is to discover why young people are, or aren’t, mobile, the preceding evidence suggests looking towards informal learning contexts, most obviously the family. It is the particular “habitus” created by the family that appears to have most infuence in terms of creating, and destroying, mobility potential. This is of course reminiscent of what psychologists refer to as “social learning” (see Cairns and Growiec 2011) but in the present context, mobility behaviour is not so much a process of imitation as one of adhering to a set of values, usually inculcated over a period of time. And what the family says, in the case of those who are almost certain to leave, is that transnational mobility, particularly for work or study, is a good idea. Moving on to the question of whether or not mobility is associated with familial affuence, and by implication that mobility is more a means of replicating social inequality than a way of escaping disadvantage, it is apparent that many of the most mobile young people encountered here are also among those richest in terms of inherited social and economic resources, and crucially, are from families who recognise the role of mobility in replicating social and economic advantage. This of course does not mean that those from less well-off families cannot be mobile, only that it may be harder for them to recognise a need to move or indeed work out how to incorporate transnational movement into their educational and occupational trajectories. There is however one important recent development which may challenge this paradigm, which is the growing impact, particularly in the Portuguese context, of the economic crisis and its accompanying austerity programmes, the full impact of which will be interesting to observe as the crisis continues.
D References Bourdieu P. (1990), The Logic of Practice, Stanford California Press, Stanford.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Cairns D. (2008), “Moving in transition: An exploration of Northern Ireland youth and geographical mobility”, Young, 16(3), pp. 227-49. Cairns D. (2012), “‘I wouldn’t want to stay here’: Economic crisis and youth mobility in Ireland”, International Migration. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/10.1111/j.1468-2435.2012.00776.x/full Cairns D. and Growiec K. (2011), “Learning insularity: Social learning, social capital and staying at home among European youth”, Beckerman Z. and Geisen T. (eds), Migration, minorities, and learning – understanding cultural and social differences in education, Springer, New York, pp. 729-42.
Cairns D., Growiec K. and Smyth J. (2012a), “Leaving Northern Ireland: The youth mobility feld, habitus and recession among undergraduates in Belfast”, British Journal of Sociology of Education, ifrst, 1-19 (DOI:10.1080/01425692.2012.723869).
Cairns D., Growiec K. and Smyth J. (2012b), “Spatial refexivity and undergraduate transitions in the Republic of Ireland after the Celtic Tiger”, Journal of Youth Studies, 15(7), 841-857 (DOI 10.1080/13676261.2012.683404).
David Cairns
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
11 95
Cairns, D. and Growiec K., Opportunity in crisis? Student mobility decision-making in Portugal during the economic crisis (forthcoming). Cairns D. and Smyth J. (2011), “‘I don’t know about living abroad’: Exploring student mobility and immobility in Northern Ireland”, International Migration, 49(2), pp. 135-61. Findlay A. M. et al. (2006), “Ever reluctant Europeans. The changing geographies of UK students studying and working abroad”, European Urban and Regional Studies, 13, pp. 291-318.
Findlay A. M. et al. (2012), “World class? An investigation of globalisation, difference and international student mobility”, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(1), pp. 118-31. King R. et al. (2011), “Reproducing advantage: The perspective of English school-leavers on studying abroad”, Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9(2), pp. 243-63.
King R. and Ruiz-Gelices E. (2003), “International student migration and the European ‘Year Abroad’: Effects on European identity and subsequent migration behaviour”, International Journal of Population Geography, 9, pp. 229-52. Maiworm F. (2002), “Erasmus: Continuity and change in the 1990s”, European Journal of Education, 36(4), pp. 459-72.
Murphy-Lejeune E. (2002), Student mobility and narrative in Europe. The new strangers, Routledge, London.
Rivza B. and Teichler U. (2007), “The changing role of student mobility”, Higher Education Policy, 20, pp. 457-75. Teichler U. (1996), “Student mobility in the framework of Erasmus”, European Journal of Education, 21(2), pp. 153-79.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Thomson R. and Taylor R. (2005), “Between cosmopolitanism and the locals: Mobility as a resource in the transition to adulthood”, Young, 13(4), pp. 327-42.
Preconditions for movement in Portugal and Ireland
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Søren Kristensen
Mobility as a pedagogical tool for young people with fewer opportunities
T
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
he involvement of “young people with fewer opportunities” (or “disadvantaged groups”) is an important issue in both policies and practices on transnational learning mobility, at European as well as at national level. Many mobility schemes earmark a signifcant part of their funds for the inclusion of these groups, or list them as a prioritised target. “Disadvantage” is a slippery term to work with, since the defnition is generally contextually embedded. In one sense, therefore, we may all at one time or another belong to that group, given the right (or rather, wrong) circumstances. In this particular context, however, it is normally defned as a lack of formal qualifcations, often combined with other problems of a psycho-social character and/or related to, for instance, health, gender or race. The arguments for including this target group in transnational mobility projects are generally motivated by notions of equity and representation: they should have the same opportunities for participating as mainstream youth. However, the insertion of fragile young people in mobility projects designed for mainstream youth is not unproblematic and may lead to negative outcomes. Involvement just for the sake of involvement seems a risky proposal, unless we have a clear
2
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
98
expectation of a benefcial impact and are prepared to make a special effort. Rather than a concern for equal opportunities, our primary motivation should therefore be refections about mobility as a pedagogical tool and what “added value” we can achieve for this particular target group. Key questions are: what outcomes in terms of learning and personal development can we achieve, is it realistic to accomplish this, what mechanisms promote the acquisition of such skills and competences, and what organisation and support is needed to underpin this? In the following, I will try and explore these questions on the basis of existing research as well as available anecdotal evidence.
D The objectives and effects of mobility Concerning the intended effects of a mobility experience on participants, even a brief look at the feld will show that transnational mobility used as a tool for learning is indeed a versatile instrument, employed as an instrument for (mostly non-formal) learning processes for various ends. Even though mobility schemes often list several objectives that they wish to achieve with their activities, they can nevertheless historically be divided into four major groups by their primary objective (Kristensen 2004a). Schemes thus generally fund activities to achieve the following learning outcomes:
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
• intercultural understanding: combating nationalism, racism and xenophobia; • labour market mobility: encouraging (young) people to live and work in another country; • international skills: promoting foreign-language acquisition, knowledge of foreign markets and cultures; • employability: developing personal and vocational skills to facilitate insertion into the labour market.
Some of these are more pertinent to a target group of young people with fewer opportunities than others. The discourse on learning mobility as a means for improving employability has thus been of growing importance in recent years, and the word now appears in the preambles of most mobility schemes in the felds of education, training and youth. In recent years, in particular the European Social Fund has been used to fund or co-fund mobility schemes or activities as a means for developing employability. As an example, one can mention the German IdA-Programme (Integration through Exchange),23 which was set up in 2007 with a total budget of 92 million euros for a fve-year period. The programme fnances work placements abroad for a duration of one to six months, and specifcally targets young people with fewer opportunities with a view to improving their position in the labour market or motivating them for formal vocational training. But IdA is just one manifestation of a clearly discernible trend (European Commission, 2012).
But do these activities actually deliver what we expect them to deliver? Skills acquisition and personal development both of a cognitive and affective nature acquired during what are often short-term stays abroad can be very hard to observe and measure, and even with observable changes it can be diffcult to establish the chain of causality, especially in a long-term perspective. We can thus never objectively “prove” that this is the case, as in a mathematical equation; we need to work with probabilities and cumulative evidence. A recent evaluative research project, fnanced by the Federal Agency for Vocational Training in Germany and directly targeting learning outcomes of mobility for disadvantaged groups (Becker et al. 2012), concludes 23. See www.esf.de/portal/generator/17840/ida__projects__calls.html, accessed 1 February 2013.
Søren Kristensen
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
12 99
that these experiences actually do confer an added value on the participants. First and foremost this is in the shape of personal development: increased self-esteem, self-confdence, independence, adaptability, as well as social and communicative skills. In addition, the acquisition of more hard-nosed skills like increased foreignlanguage profciency and vocational skills is observable. The mid-term evaluation of the IdA-Programme (2011) comes to similar conclusions, and we have several other studies and evaluations as well as masses of anecdotal evidence that all point in the same direction – enough to allow us to conclude that a structured stay abroad can be a very powerful tool for learning and personal development. Yet as with all other tools, there is also evidence to the effect that it can do harm if not handled in an appropriate manner – it is by no means diffcult to fnd examples of participants who return home prematurely, or with a negative experience, because something went wrong along the way. Learning mobility is a pedagogical intervention, and not just a matter of logistical planning. Yet before moving on to the instrumental aspects (the “how”) of mobility as a pedagogical tool, it is important to have an understanding of the learning processes involved (the “why”).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Learning in mobility projects “Learning by leaving” is a complex process, but the main dynamics spring from the experience of what the American theoretician and researcher Jack Mezirow (Mezirow 2000) has called the “disorienting dilemma” (or, in the words of the English researcher Peter Jarvis, “experiences of disjuncture” – Jarvis 1999) in the meeting with another culture. Aspects of life which have hitherto been taken for granted are challenged by other ways of seeing and doing things, and this provokes a process of refection, where participants must adjust and rearrange their mental frameworks to try and come to terms with this “new reality” that they have become a part of. Mezirow (without actually having transnational mobility in mind) has called this process “transformative learning”. To accomplish this, both practically and mentally, the participants must develop new insights, skills and competences. The intensity of this learning process is, of course, directly proportional to the length of the stay and the degree of integration into the environment of the host country. It is perfectly possible to come out of a short-term, superfcial stay with little or no learning, but properly planned and executed stays abroad represent a rich potential for learning and personal development. Yet learning through these “disorienting dilemmas” is not a painless process, as it so to speak feeds on the existence of problems and barriers. Instances of premature return due to a failure to cope with these are known from all schemes, even when we are dealing with mainstream youth who are not in the “disadvantaged” category. Subjecting fragile young people with few resources to such an experience is not without risks and pitfalls, and it certainly requires a high degree of professionalism in the organisers. The image of mobility as a “tool” is apt here: you may use a hammer to build a house, but you may also use it to hit somebody on the head, if you’re not careful... A 2004 Cedefop study on the participation of disadvantaged groups in mobility projects (Kristensen 2004b) focuses on the development of mobility projects as a pedagogical tool for this target group. It is a qualitative study based on data obtained from document analyses and interviews with organisers from eight different European placement schemes. In the conclusions of the study, two aspects of the learning potential of these experiences are highlighted as especially relevant for the target group. One is concerned with the use of the stay abroad as a “free space”, as an environment where the participants may act free of the expectations that they are surrounded
Mobility as a pedagogical tool for young people with fewer opportunities
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
100
with in their daily life. Many disadvantages are, to a large extent, social constructions, and many disadvantaged young people are continually confrmed in their status by the (negative) expectations of their surroundings. Placing them in a new environment – risky as it might be – also gives them the possibility to act free of many of the constraints they experience in their daily life: to experiment with aspects of their personality that are normally suppressed and to a certain extent “reinvent themselves” without fearing the disapproval of their peers. The other hinges on the motivational value of a stay abroad for persons who often are hardly mobile in their daily lives, and for whom the thought of moving to even a neighbouring town to pursue opportunities for education or employment represents an insurmountable barrier. For such people, the experience of successfully accomplishing a stay in a foreign country may provide an impetus to cross other borders, which now suddenly appear less formidable in comparison with what they have achieved.
D The ÒengineeringÓ of learning mobility Given the almost endless permutations of the target group and the many forms learning mobility may take, it is not possible to provide a detailed recipe for the planning and execution of learning mobility projects: a “one-size-fts-all” model that may be applied in all circumstances. Special allowance needs to be made for the specifc nature of the target group, and interventions need to be developed or adapted accordingly. Sending out young, physically handicapped people individually on work placements abroad to improve their chances for integration into the labour market, and taking a group of young school dropouts from a socially deprived area abroad to deconstruct their prejudices about foreigners – these are surely two very different things. However, on the basis of existing theory and evidence from research, I would venture the following three general recommendations as specifcally pertinent pedagogical advice for organisers of learning mobility working with disadvantaged groups of young people.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Make sure objectives and methods match Many projects operate with a plurality of wildly divergent objectives and often at such a high level of abstraction that it is virtually impossible to evaluate the success (or otherwise) of the intervention (European Commission 2012). Also, there seems to be little conscious refection on the connection between these and the type of mobility used: is it really realistic to achieve the intended objectives with a stay abroad of the nature chosen? Especially for a target group of young people with fewer opportunities, it is important to be clear about the objectives of the project, and to ensure that the methods used are in line with these. If the main aim is to develop intercultural understanding and the deconstruction of prejudices against people of another nationality or race, this happens according to relevant theory – for example the so-called “contact hypothesis” by Amir (1967) – best in encounters with peer groups, that is other young people of a roughly similar age, background and status. An appropriate form of mobility may therefore be participation in a work camp, where young people from different nationalities get together to carry out a specifc task or project, for example the restoration of a building, or the preparation and enactment of a play. If the main focus is on employability and integration into the labour market, however, a placement in a public or private company is more likely to achieve the desired effects. Also, choices concerning for instance duration, type of accommodation (e.g. hostel or home stay), mode of sending (group or individuals), target country and so on should make sense in relation to the desired outcomes.
Søren Kristensen
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
12 101
Strike the right balance between the challenges of the experience and the resources of the target group At the very core of the use of mobility as a pedagogical tool lies the idea of employing “disorienting dilemmas” as a launching pad for the learning processes. If organisers consistently try to eliminate all problems for the participants to give them as pleasant an experience as possible, they have misunderstood what it is all about (Reichel 1999). But it makes sense to try and help the participants by removing trivial, practical problems that can take the focus and energy away from those that are crucial to the learning processes, to prepare them by giving them knowledge and competences that can help them solve these, and to monitor the stays so that it is possible to intervene if things threaten to fall apart. Generally, when dealing with a target group of young people with few resources, it is essential to ensure that the challenges they encounter are of a nature and scope that, realistically, they (maybe with a little help) can overcome. The term “scaffolding” from social constructivist theory is appropriate here: the organiser should provide just enough support to allow the participants to reach heights they would not have been able to scale alone, but the ownership of the process belongs to the participants.
Adopt a holistic view on all phases of the project: before, during and after
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Adequate preparation for a mobility experience ideally contains linguistic, cultural, practical, psychological and pedagogical aspects. During the stay, monitoring and possibly mentoring must be provided. In the debriefng phase, participants must be helped to discuss and refect on their experiences, learning outcomes (both intended and unintended) must be evaluated, documented and possibly recognised; and guidance must be provided to help them act on the knowledge, skills and competences they have acquired. All these phases are in themselves of vital importance to the project, but even more important – as argued by, for instance, La Brack (1993) and Stadler (1994) – is the totality of the three: without adequate preparation, the stay may disintegrate, but without provisions for monitoring and/or mentoring during the stay, even the best preparation may be of no avail. Finally, if outcomes are not properly followed up afterwards, the whole experience may be stored away in a remote attic in the heads of the participants and have no impact on their future lives. The interventions in all three phases must be geared to the target group and consistent with one another. This is true for all mobility experiences undertaken for learning purposes, but whereas one may get away with little when dealing with resourceful young people and still register a positive impact, a careless attitude to this with disadvantaged target groups is likely to produce a disaster, with participants ending up with a negative experience and even worse off than before.
D Calibrating the tool As stated initially in this article, the number of schemes and the concomitant fnancing available to learning mobility projects involving disadvantaged groups is rising, but unfortunately, so is the target group – levels of youth unemployment in Europe are reaching unprecedented heights as the fnancial crisis continues. Many young people hit by the crisis are not necessarily disadvantaged according to the defnition used in this chapter – they have qualifcations and are resourceful; they just happen to live at a time when there aren’t enough jobs to go round. They do not really require a “free space”, but any space that will allow them to get active and involved and add a useful line to their CVs. Generally, however, the number of NEETs (those young people “Not in Employment, Education or Training”) is growing, since bad times hit those proportionally worse who were already in a
Mobility as a pedagogical tool for young people with fewer opportunities
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
102
precarious situation. As evaluations and research show, through participation in learning mobility they may acquire some of the knowledge, skills and competences or the impetus required to improve their situation, but it is not just a matter of sending them out and getting them back alive. Learning mobility is a pedagogical intervention and requires a structured and informed approach, carefully tailored to the needs of the target group and the objectives.
D References Amir Y. (1969), “Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 71, No.5, Washington.
Becker C., Goldkamp S. and Kroos D. (2012), Grenzüberschreitende Mobilität bei sozial benachteiligten Jugendlichen in der Berufsbildung – Kompetenzerwerb und besonderer Nutzen der Auslandserfahrung, NA beim BIBB, available at www.na-bibb.de/service/veranstaltungen/veranstaltungsdokumentationen/ 07052012_fachtagung_mobilitaet_kompetenzerwerb_fuer_benachteiligte.html, accessed 1 December 2012. European Commission (2012), Study on mobility developments in school education, vocational education and training, adult education and youth exchanges, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/more-information/reports-and-studies_en.htm, accessed 1 December 2012.
Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (2011), Mid-term review of the ESF-programme IdA: Integration through exchange, available at www.esf.de/portal/ generator/17396/property=data/2011__12__01__ida__konferenz__brosch__en.pdf, accessed 1 December 2012.
Jarvis P. (1999), The practitioner-researcher: Developing theory from practice, Jossey-Bass, New York. Kristensen S. (2004a), Learning by leaving – transnational placements as a pedagogical tool in the context of VET in Europe, Offce for Offcial Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Kristensen S. (2004b), Disadvantaged groups in transnational placement projects, Offce for Offcial Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. La Brack B. (1993), “The missing linkage: The process of integrating orientation and re-entry”, Michael Paige R. (ed.), Education for the intercultural experience, Intercultural Press Inc., Yarmouth. Mezirow J. (2000), “Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation theory”, Mezirow J. (ed.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress, Jossey-Bass, New York.
Reichel D. (1999), “The Franco-German Youth Organisation: Refections on 35 years of experience”, International Reconstruction – European Yearbook on Youth Policy and Research, Vol. 2, Walther de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.
Stadler P. (1994), Globales und Interkulturelles Lernen in Verbindung mit Auslandsaufenthalten – ein Bildungskonzept, Verlag für Entwicklungspolitik Breitenbach GmbH, Saarbrücken.
Søren Kristensen
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Yaryna Borenko
Challenges for recognition of non-formal learning and learning mobility in Ukraine: education, labour market and society
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
U
kraine is close to signing an Association Agreement with the EU and as with other Eastern Partnership countries is encouraged to intensify its participation in European educational and youth programmes. However, the approaches proposed by the EU are not coherent with the existing national frameworks and, as a result, the recognition of competences of young people gained through participation in educational and youth programmes is structurally challenged. The added value of non-formal learning including learning mobility is often contradicted by the current approaches to education and youth policy. How to validate the best practices seems to be the biggest challenge for non-governmental actors working towards recognition of nonformal education and transformation of education in the country.
D Non-formal learning and mobility on a policy level
3
As set out in the Joint Declaration of the Eastern Partnership Summit held in Warsaw in September 2011: Co-operation and policy dialogue under the Eastern Partnership on education, research, youth and culture should be further enhanced, including through the launch of an Eastern
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
104
Partnership Youth Programme, the continuation of the Eastern Partnership Culture Programme and expanding participation in relevant programmes, including the successor of the Lifelong Learning, Culture and Youth in Action Programmes. (Joint Declaration of the Eastern Partnership Summit, Council of the European Union 2011)
Additionally, the Platform IV “Contact between People” of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum emphasises the need to “facilitate non-formal education and increase funding for internships and volunteer opportunities, school exchange programmes and distance learning” (Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum 2011) as one of its recommendations to the European Commission and national governments in the feld of youth and education. Nevertheless, the tools provided by the European Commission as well as by the Council of Europe and other EU countries, though accepted and used by nongovernmental actors, are not linked to the national strategies in the feld of youth, culture and education. Additionally, a cross-sector approach is lacking, which leads to incoherence of strategies in the feld of youth and education. The issue of nonformal education is relevant for non-governmental actors. There is no recognition of non-formal education and training within the educational system and youth work. All extracurricular activities are integrated into the system of formal education and have a very weak mobility dimension. As a rule, non-formal education is the domain of non-governmental organisations, which are suffciently skilled in international youth project management and/or providing trainings for youth workers. But the meaning of “youth work” is rather undefned and is set in relation to an international activity.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The current developments in educational policy are directed towards fnalising the transformation of the high school system according to the standards of a European Higher Education Area. In that context, long-term learning is added to the agenda. From another perspective, long-term learning is limited to vocational training and training provided by state educational establishments; therefore the issue of non-formal education is excluded. Within long-term learning, learning and formal education mobility may be recognised as added value, but there are no clear tools and procedures. Therefore, learning mobility usually depends on the personal motivation of learners and this motivation of learners is the domain of non-governmental actors. At present, attempts to advocate non-formal learning and learning mobility have very weak output at the policy level. A reasonable explanation for this is the lack of capacity and common visions among non-governmental actors and their escaping from politics as a reaction to non-transparent procedures.
D Consequences of learning mobility and migration Nowadays the willingness to emigrate is a visible trend with regard to young people and opportunities for long-term learning mobility are often used as chances to stay abroad for employability. Statistical data and sociological surveys show that professional development and employability are most valued by young people. Nevertheless, it is understandable that expectations of employment have a weak connection with expectations from education. In 2009, the unemployment rate among young people in Ukraine increased to 18% (30-40% of registered unemployed people are aged 35 years or younger) and 21% of young Ukrainians didn’t have any income of their own. Moreover, 44% of young people were afraid of becoming unemployed in the next two years (Diuk 2012). The newest surveys confrm the existing tendencies, with more than half of the young people aged 18 to 29 wanting to leave the country. There are up to 6.5 million Ukrainians living
Yaryna Borenko
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
13 105
in other countries (14.4% of the population), and up to 1.5 million of them left the country to fnd employment abroad from 2005 to 2008. Of the emigrants, 45.5% were 15 to 35 years old (Open Ukraine Foundation 2009). The situation has changed in the last 10 years, with Ukraine suffering from the emigration of adults. Currently, most of the emigrants are students or young professionals.
However, certain assessments of migration and the crisis of the labour market tend to connect learning mobility with euroscepticism. There are strong voices emphasising the negative infuences of European integration and the “brain drain” caused by opportunities to study abroad. High school and ministerial representatives as well as researchers note the threats posed by the asymmetry in the exchange of human capital, claiming that emigrants are young people who will not come back in the near future. Even though there is no comprehensive research available on the long-lasting effects of students’ and young researchers’ learning or fellowship stays abroad, there are in fact many instances of such emigrants staying abroad for employment afterwards (Mokij et al. 2009). It is quite recognised that emigration is a reaction of young people to poverty, political and economic instability and to the lack of professional perspectives. The political explanations for this situation vary from statements that claim that Ukraine has a good educational system and a bad labour market to the recognition that the Ukrainian education system is bad because it does not ft the economy. Moreover, there is no comprehensive research available on this issue, although representatives of human resources departments in the business sector have emphasised that between 40% and 80% of universities’ alumni are not working in the professions they were trained for (Hryshchenko 2012). The rising level of students’ mobility and subsequent emigration is considered to be dangerous because of the strong motivation of young people to leave the country for a long time. The number of foreign students, coming mostly from Asian or African countries, has doubled during the last 10 years (47 000 in 2010 compared with 22 000 in 2002, International Organization for Migration 2011). However, they are usually contracted for a full study period and motivated to return home. They are also not considered potential actors in the labour market. The attempts “to keep” human capital in the country is one of the most relevant issues in current discussions on educational issues. From another perspective, no political response has developed to the challenges of immigration and there is no strategy to make the educational system more open to foreigners, or to reorient mobility from migration to learning.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Learning mobility in a European perspective The Erasmus Mundus Programme of the EU is aimed at supporting individual mobility for students and researchers between the EU and third countries. Promoted as the main tool for learning mobility and due to transparent recruitment, Erasmus spreads the understanding that studying abroad can be possible. However, the number of students and researchers from Ukraine remains extremely low – there were 130 students and 27 researchers who benefted from the programme during the period 2004 to 2009. In 2009/10, 36 Ukrainians went abroad for Master’s studies (National Tempus Offce in Ukraine). For a country with 47 million inhabitants and 2.7 million students it seems clear that this is a very selective procedure with limited access, so students tend to look towards studying independently with a strong motivation to being employed abroad. Up to 5 000 Ukrainians were enrolled in Poland in the academic year 2010/11, for example, which accounts for 23% of foreign students in the country (Central Statistical Offce 2011). Polish
Challenges for recognition of non-formal learning and learning mobility in Ukraine
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
106
universities make international exchanges available to foreign students, provide internships in business and European diplomas, and declare that they combine university traditions and history with current challenges coming from the labour market. This indicates that Poland expects foreign students to be potential players in the labour market. The infuence of strong migration on learning and employability is still not evaluated or foreseen in Ukraine. It has not been investigated to what extent students can realise their expectations for employability in EU countries or in the United States, which are the main targets of immigration. Nevertheless, studying abroad independently requires personal fnancial investment and makes the orientation towards studying abroad for living and working much stronger.
The statement that young Ukrainians can be considered a lost generation is a popular one in Ukrainian society. There are several perspectives on this. The frst one concludes that the generation of young professionals are lost because of their low chances of fnding a job on the labour market. The second perspective is a result of youth literature and cultural trends, which draw parallels to the “lost generation” in European and American young culture in the period between the world wars. In fact, Ukraine has not had social stability since the beginning of the 1980s, and the current economic crisis resulting from global tendencies could also be considered a long-lasting period of “transformation with no perspective”, which causes rapid changes of value systems, priorities, social structures and the expectations of young people. So some reasons can be found for the claims that Ukraine is losing human capital because of the openness of education in Europe. On the other hand, state policy became more restrictive, as education and living costs rose, so student migration can be considered a rational choice. In both cases, current educational policy and strategies in the humanitarian and social sphere do not correspond to the current challenges.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Challenges for the social recognition of non-formal learning and mobility As learning mobility is not usual in Ukraine, the international experience is considered a personal success. On the social level, we cannot speak about the validation of learning, but of the personal experience of “being abroad”. For disadvantaged young people the experience of going outside of their own community can also be a challenge: according to unoffcial surveys, one third of Ukrainians have never been in regions other than their own within the country. The lack of internal mobility in society constitutes a narrow base for the recognition of mobility as learning, so it is seen rather as a positive emotional experience. This leads to a low level of selfrecognition of the competences gained outside of the formal system.
Non-formal education and the Youth in Action Programme, as primary tools for learning mobility, offer a more real possibility to be involved in another kind of learning for diverse groups of young people. The impact of the Youth in Action Programme in communities is more visible, despite the fact that the number of participants in Youth in Action is also low. In the years 2007 to 2010, Ukrainian organisations hosted 154 and sent 278 volunteers abroad in the framework of the European Voluntary Service. Ukraine led eastern Europe and the Caucasus countries in the number of youth exchanges, trainings and networking projects (from 2007 to 2010 Ukrainian non-governmental organisations took part in 520 projects, including 268 youth exchanges, 51 of which were hosted in Ukraine, SALTO EECA RC 2011). Ukraine has been sending abroad many more volunteers than it has
Yaryna Borenko
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
13 107
been hosting and the number of projects involving volunteers abroad has increased much faster than projects it has hosted. This situation is untypical for eastern Europe and the Caucasus region and the reasons may be strongly political and structural: there is a lack of support from the state and local authorities and high living costs for volunteers in Ukraine, and there is a restrictive visa system for potential foreign volunteers as well as other legal barriers for the implementation of projects. Nevertheless, in comparison to governmental and European programmes in the framework of formal education, the Youth in Action Programme is potentially available for young people with fewer possibilities and seeks to avoid elitism. However, there are several obstacles. First of all, the opportunities given by the Youth in Action Programme do not have direct connections to youth and education policy and involve a limited scale of actors (non-governmental organisations, youth/student groups or community leaders). As Ukraine is not included in the process of recognition of non-formal education, non-formal education activities are mostly matters for non-governmental organisations, mainly those that are apolitical or in opposition to the government. Such activities are also often involved in controversies in relation to offcial youth, educational, social and cultural policies. Secondly, young people, especially those with fewer opportunities, often suffer under a restrictive visa system by being considered potential migrants. Thirdly, the experience gained though participation in a non-formal educational activity is diffcult to apply in the conservative school/ university culture within the country. As a result the feeling of overcoming barriers remains mostly at the emotional level of being happy at going abroad, eliminating the space for rational refection on competences. Despite this, participants in youth exchanges and the European Volunteer Service become more aware of life in different countries, gain a critical attitude to the realities, are able to take an independent position regarding their professional pathway and become more active in society and in the labour market.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Extracts from best practices During the evaluation session of the project on “The best practices for informing on participation of Ukrainians in the EU Youth in Action Programme and other international youth programmes” (Centre for Educational Initiatives 2012) leaders and participants from eight organisations with a minimum of two years’ experience in international youth programmes agreed that, “International youth projects provide participants themselves and others with experience; it is a possibility to open up to the world, to overcome stereotypes and learn how to solve problems together; it is a chance to make your dream a reality and to create a future for yourself”. There was also a strong accent on intercultural exchange (“we can bring something from our country and get new experience in your country”), skills in planning, organising and managing projects with an emphasis on promotion or idealistic attitudes to “changing yourself, making the world better and have the possibility to contribute to society”. The evaluation of best practices shows that through participation in non-formal educational activities young people become more active in the community and become aware of themselves as active citizens. They also refect their role as citizens of the country and as students in schools and become more inventive in the labour market. Unfortunately, they also realise that studying in high school does
Challenges for recognition of non-formal learning and learning mobility in Ukraine
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
108
not fulfl their expectations and they would rather use their skills for fnding better opportunities for learning mobility in the frame of formal education. Moreover, they become more fexible in changing their professional orientation.
Final remarks should be made on the need to organise comprehensive youth research and dialogue among different stakeholders on the impact of non-formal education and learning mobility on the situation of young people. The lack of a legislative provision for non-formal education and youth work makes non-formal education the domain of non-governmental actors. Indeed, there are no support structures within the country and non-formal learning is provided in a chaotic way, causing deep gaps between formal and non-formal education.
D References Central Statistical Offce (2011), Higher education institutions and their fnances 2010, Statistical Publishing Establishment, Warsaw.
Centre for Educational Initiatives (2012), The best practices for informing on participation of Ukrainians in the EU Youth in Action Programme and other international youth programmes, International Renaissance Foundation, Project Grant #44974. Council of the European Union (2011), Joint Declaration of the Eastern Partnership Summit, Warsaw, 29-30 September 2011, Warsaw, 30 September 2011, 14983/11. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/neighbourhood/eastern_partnership/ documents/warsaw_summit_declaration_en.pdf, accessed 1 February 2013.
Diuk N. M. (2012), The next generation in Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan: Youth, politics, identity, and change, Rowman & Littlefeld, New York. Eastern Partnership Society Forum, available at: www.eap-csf.eu/en/working-groups/ wg4-contacts-between-people, accessed 1 February 2013.
Hryshchenko H. “Nesapytani pytannia”, Ukrainskyy Tyzhden No. 35 (252).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
International Organization for Migration (2011), Migration in Ukraine. Facts & fgures, IOM Mission in Ukraine, Kiev. Mokij A. I. and Lapshyna I. A. (2009), “Academic mobility: Challenges and threats for human capital of Ukraine”, Naukovyy Visnyk Volynskoho Natsionalnoho Universytetu, National Tempus Offce in Ukraine, pp. 14-17, available from www.tempus.org.ua, accessed 1 February 2013. Open Ukraine Foundation, Victor Pinchuk Foundation and World Bank (2009), Zovnishnya trudova mihratsiya naselennya Ukrainy [External labour migration of population of Ukraine], Open Ukraine Foundation Publishing, Kiev. SALTO EECA RC (2011), “Report on co-operation of programme countries with Eastern Europe and Caucasus region within the Youth in Action Programme between 2007-2010”, available at www.salto-youth.net/eeca, accessed 1 February 2013.
Yaryna Borenko
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Marta Brzezin´ska-Hubert
Youth mobility: towards more self-directed and holistic learning D Introduction One’s destination is never a place, but a new way of seeing things. – Henry Miller
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
I
n contemporary societies characterised by rapid change, complexity, ambiguity and technological innovation, young people cannot be assured about their future professional lives. It has become vital for them to de-learn and re-learn and to use their resources in the way that is best for them. Thus, the importance of the learning to learn competence, which may be understood in this context as the ability to identify one’s own learning needs, to be aware of one’s learning potential as well as to self-organise the learning process and to apply the knowledge, skills and attitudes in new contexts. What is more, learning to learn is believed to be a “meta-competence” since it infuences how other competences are selected, acquired and applied. At the same time, the processes of European integration, migration, the growing physical mobility between countries as well as the development of virtual mobility bring various cultures together, making intercultural competences essential. In the light of this, the European Commission, the Council of Europe and the EU-Council
4
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
110
of Europe youth partnership have been implementing several programmes and initiatives in the feld of formal and non-formal youth educational mobility.
Taking into consideration the above, this paper concentrates mainly on the learning process of an individual youth participant. It assumes that learning mobility gives every young person a chance to become a more empowered and responsible learner, which in turn constitutes the basis for long-term benefts such as youth employment, entrepreneurship and intercultural understanding (EC 2009). Therefore, taking the example of the Erasmus, Comenius (formal education framework) and Youth in Action (non-formal education framework) Programmes, the purpose of this article is two-fold: frst, to explore the differences and interrelations between formal, informal and non-formal education in the youth feld; second, to investigate how, according to the chosen learning theories and approaches, learning mobility programmes for young people may foster a more holistic and self-directed learning.
D Formal, non-formal and informal learning
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
To quote Carl Rogers, “human beings have a natural potential for learning” (Rogers 1969). In their early years children learn spontaneously, following needs and curiosity. This is an internally motivated, organic and mostly experience-based process which may be identifed as informal learning. During a life span, people continue to learn informally in various everyday situations, dealing with challenges or tasks in a given context – personal, social or cultural (Colley et al. 2003). Although often unconscious and incidental, this way of learning is learner-oriented and, as Marsick and Watkins put it, “the control of learning rests primarily in the hands of the learner” (2001). When school obligations start, a new learning dimension is added to young learners’ lives. It is defned as formal learning and characterised by clear institutional structure, certifcation and external evaluation. It is to a large extent compulsory, provided by specifcally qualifed staff and taking place in the classroom with pre-defned objectives and methods of learning (Chisholm 2005). Based on the enlightenment rationality and Cartesian separation of body and mind, the system of formal education seemed to provide learners with accumulated and context-free knowledge and, for many decades, was regarded as superior to the informal one (Colley et al. 2002). Nevertheless, the recognition of advantages of informal education can be recently observed, especially when linguistic and “soft” skills, such as teamwork or confict management, are concerned. At the same time, criticisms of formal education involve the fact that although it is often defned as intentional from the learner’s perspective, it does not necessarily refect the learners’ real motivation. What is more, due to external marking the intrinsic motivation is often lost in favour of external motivation that in turn may result in “production” of dependent, passive learners and test-oriented teachers.
Between formal and informal learning there is a space that may be flled with a third dimension of learning based on conscious intention, voluntary participation, personal interests and needs. This is non-formal learning taking the form of various activities (e.g. sports clubs, choirs, scouting, youth associations). The youth partnership glossary defnes non-formal learning as: purposive but voluntary learning that takes place in a diverse range of environments and situations for which teaching/training and learning is not necessarily their sole or main activity. These environments and situations may be intermittent or transitory, and the activities or courses that take place may be staffed by professional learning facilitators (such as youth trainers) or by volunteers (such as youth leaders). The activities and courses are planned, but
Marta Brzezin´ska-Hubert
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
14 111
are seldom structured by conventional rhythms or curriculum subjects. They usually address specifc target groups, but rarely document or assess learning outcomes or achievements in conventionally visible ways (Chisholm 2005).
Since the 1995 White Paper on education and training, non-formal education has become one of the fundamental issues of various European strategies in the feld of lifelong learning as well as mobility and youth, both from the perspective of employment and personal development (EC 1995). Non-formal learning is still strongly discussed in the European youth feld due to its various defnitions, approaches and features. What is essential for the purpose of this paper is: in nonformal education learners take responsibility for planning, organising and assessing their own learning process while the trainers or facilitators’ role is to support them. The methods are generally based on experience, active participation, discovery, dialogue and collaboration with peer learners. Clear borders or interrelations?
Colley et al. (2002) attempted to identify “ideal types” of formal and informal learning based on 20 different defnitions. Furthermore, instead of concentrating on differences and boundaries, they decided to examine the interrelations between the forms of education in different contexts by conducting empirical studies at diverse learning sites. They discovered that formal and informal dimensions are present in almost all learning situations, that there are no distinct categories, while the boundaries between them are blurred and interrelated. Thus: seeing informal and formal learning as fundamentally separate results in stereotyping and a tendency for the advocates of one to see only the weaknesses of the other. It is more sensible to see attributes of informality and formality as present in all learning situations (Colley et al. 2003).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Following from that, it may also be assumed that an element of formal and informal learning is inherently present in most non-formal learning situations. It seems to be observable that these three theoretically defned kinds of learning overlap in practice in European mobility programmes.
In the European Voluntary Service (EVS), which is a youth mobility non-formal education programme, equal importance is given to experience and competences gained by volunteers in their work and their spare time. Moreover, EVS host organisations are often embedded in more formal, institutional settings, thus making volunteers learn in non-formal ways in a given formal framework. When it comes to Comenius pupils and Erasmus students, they learn formally in their host schools and informally by gathering with friends, living with host families or in dormitories, travelling or developing their passions in their free time. What is more, sometimes they participate in non-formal activities like workshops, student organisations or voluntary courses. As a youth trainer and facilitator I conducted trainings for incoming and outgoing pupils and assistants. Although obligatory, these trainings were led in experiential and learner-centred ways, with coffee breaks and evenings providing space for informal learning. Thus, the boundaries were shifted and blurred. It was also refected in the evaluation by participants, who declared that apart from acquiring new knowledge they became more self-confdent in establishing contacts, expressing themselves and working in a team.
Learning mobility does not only refer to international mobility, but also to educational mobility – often in the sense of personal recognition of non-formal and informal learning. This is often the case for the participants of the Youth in Action
Youth mobility: towards more self-directed and holistic learning
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
112
Programme projects such as youth exchanges, EVS or training courses. The tendency to recognise non-formal learning through certain forms of certifcation is another aspect that moves non-formal education towards formal education. From the meta perspective, the aim of bringing together the learning outcomes from all areas of learning and making them visible is to match the human management needs of employers and the competence validation needs of individuals (Corladyn 2004). With the introduction of the Youthpass Certifcate in the Youth in Action Programme, validation of learning receives another value. Based on self-assessment and learning dialogue with a mentor, Youthpass is both a certifcate and a tool for supporting the process of more conscious learning. In the light of the above, the next part of this chapter supports the assumption that different theories of learning may apply both to formal and non-formal mobility programmes. Taking into consideration the theoretical frameworks, I will be presenting some examples from my experience as educational practitioner in the youth education and training feld.
D Self-directed, holistic and context-based learning: theory and practice in youth mobility programmes The theories and approaches that will be briefy outlined below are parts of an adult learning theory mosaic. While self-directed learning takes the perspective of the individual autonomous learner, a context-based theory focuses more on the sociocultural environment of the learning process. Yet, a question needs to be raised: In what ways is the adult learning theory relevant in the youth feld?
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Cromley (2000) claims that “even though learning may seem different for adults, there is no evidence that it is different”. Also Malcolm Knowles – the father of the term andragogy – instead of opposing andragogy to pedagogy, proposed a range from teacher-directed to learner-directed learning. One of the models located on the latter extreme is the self-directed learning (SDL) approach. According to Maurice Gibbons, one of the reasons for applying SDL in the education of youth is based on the psychology of development and concerns transformational change in adolescent learners: in their bodies, personalities, values, relationships, in their place in the world. Moving from childhood to adulthood naturally brings them to the challenges and discoveries of their own identities, passions and limits, and SDL enables young people to take up these challenges (Gibbons 2002). Self-directed learning In its broadest meaning, SDL is a process in which learners – alone or with the support of others – diagnose their learning needs, formulate learning goals, identify human and material resources, implement chosen learning strategies, and document and evaluate their learning results and process (Knowles 1975). It may be thus inferred that it is strongly connected with enhancing the ability to learn. According to Chisholm (2007), one of the essential features of non-formal learning is the participatory, learner-centred process based on self-directed methods. Taking the example of Youth in Action’s short-term activities, such as youth exchanges or training courses, the programme often refects the needs of the participants and is co-created by them on the basis of individual or group evaluation time and sharing. Responsibility is given to learners with regard to what they want to learn and how they want to achieve it. In this way participants discover how to identify and express
Marta Brzezin´ska-Hubert
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
14 113
their learning needs as well as how to use various tools to document and evaluate their learning, like blogs, diaries and the already mentioned Youthpass. Also in the EVS Programme, volunteers become more secure and competent in setting, documenting and evaluating their learning. During their long-term projects they fnd out how to overcome obstacles and to redefne their learning aims according to the situation and resources available. They are supported by their mentors during the whole project and by the trainers through the training cycle. In the case of the Erasmus or Comenius Programme, it may happen that students from a hierarchic academic culture go to study in a more learner-oriented academic culture, thus developing self-directed learning skills.
Most people get involved in SDL to learn a given content and to develop the learning to learn competence. What is more, some learners experience thorough change in how they perceive themselves and their world, which leads them to the transformational dimension of learning (Caffarella 2000). First defned by Mezirow, a transformational process often begins with the “disorienting dilemma” – a personal crisis that stimulates the process of questioning embedded values, meanings or assumptions. To validate them, a person engages in dialogue with others. In some cases this personal transformation may be followed by further steps to change the realities not only of oneself but also those of others. In the EVS, Erasmus or Comenius Programmes this dimension of SDL may be related to the process of acculturation to a new environment which is often connected with a cultural shock or other “disorienting dilemmas”. If constructively solved, they lead to transformation in young people’s values and world views. On the other hand, this process may be too challenging and produce the opposite effects: hence, the importance of human and material support in the learning process of youth mobility programmes.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Holistic learning Grounded in experience, driven by inner motivation, SDL may be understood as a holistic process from two perspectives. One relates to the whole person learning and is not restricted to intellectual and propositional knowledge, but involves emotions, senses, imagination, body, and so on (Heron 1999). The vast majority of Youth in Action activities are based on Kolb’s experiential learning model, which provides participants with various dimensions of learning – emotional, refective, theoretical and practical. It gives them the possibility to refect, both individually and in a group, on a certain learning situation, to draw conclusions and to fnd ideas for transferring gained knowledge, skills or attitudes into a new real context. Apart from holistic methods related to the content, there are multi-stranded activities, going on alongside the learning, which function like energisers. Although not directly linked with the subject, they enable participants to connect with various aspects of the whole person and keep them “in a good shape for learning” (Heron 1999). From the second point of view, SDL means learning in non-isolation – it includes communication and co-operation with peer learners, facilitators or teachers, and asking them for support and feedback. It depends on a certain learning situation which in turn is infuenced by wider structural – cultural, social, economic or political – factors (Hodkinson 2004; Caraferella 2000). Context-based learning
One of the theories emphasising the cultural context is the situated cognition approach, in which people learn by becoming involved in communities of practice. These are defned by Lave and Wenger (1991) as self-organised, sometimes
Youth mobility: towards more self-directed and holistic learning
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
114
informal groups of people with an identity defned by shared aims, passions and motivations to learn. They are practitioners who are mutually and regularly involved in the learning process, which often includes interaction between peripheral (new) and more experienced (full) participants of the community located in a certain context (Smith 2003; 2009). It may be assumed that participants of the Erasmus, Comenius or EVS Programmes create certain forms of communities of practice and sometimes become involved simultaneously in a few of them. By learning from more experienced members, European Volunteers in their hosting organisations move over time from peripheral to engaged participation in not only activities, but also organisational values, norms and rules. This also refers to the acculturation process in which the young person gradually becomes more involved in the cultural practices of a host country or in a community of international volunteers, thus developing intercultural skills and attitudes such as dealing with ambiguity and change. Furthermore, participants of youth exchanges and EVS trainings create peer learning communities for a few days by sharing common learning needs, values and aims, as well as by working together on practical issues they can transfer in their real-life situations. By bringing their life stories and experiences to the group they infuence the learning situation, while in turn the learning situation affects their personal learning paths. Getting out of the box: how to support the learning process?
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Taking into consideration the above, participants of youth mobility programmes may become more self-directed and discover new ways of learning as well as develop existing ones. However, it does not happen automatically, hence the importance of learning support which can take various forms, both conventional and creative. The questions young people may ask themselves while planning a given activity or project are: “What do I want to learn?” and “how do I want to do it?” When addressing the frst question, it is worth documenting, monitoring and evaluating the progress and outcomes of learning. The latter may be a starting point for discovering one’s own potential and becoming more conscious of one’s learning preferences in various situations (e.g. whether I need more chaos or structure, safety or challenge). Another key step is to identify environmental resources such as time, space, tools and people that may be essential in making one’s learning more effective, sustainable and enjoyable. Through interactions with others young learners can realise the power of dialogue and feedback in their learning process. Therefore youth leaders, workers, mentors and trainers need to be competent and willing to provide participants of mobility programmes with support that is appropriate for a particular person or a group in a given learning context.
D Conclusion Every situation creates a potential for learning. How this potential is used by an individual learner depends on various factors, both personal and contextual. In youth mobility programmes that are naturally embedded in an intercultural learning environment and offer all types of learning – formal, non-formal and informal – it is a complex phenomenon. The question, thus, remains how the development of learning abilities may be supported even better by learners themselves as well as by youth mobility policies, tools and people engaged in young people’s learning processes. I believe that the theories and approaches described here in brief ought to be explored further by research, but it is also my hope that they will encourage youth educators and other actors practically involved in the international youth education feld to look for ways to foster selfdirected and holistic learning.
Marta Brzezin´ska-Hubert
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
14 115
D References Baumgartner L. M. (2001), “An update on transformational learning”, Merriam S. B. (ed.) The new update on adult learning theory. New directions for adult and continuing education, No. 89, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 15-24.
Caffarella R. S. (2000), “Goals of self-learning”, Straka G. A. (ed.), Conceptions of self-directed learning: Theoretical and conceptual considerations, Waxmann, Munster, pp. 37-48. Chisholm L. (2005), Bridges for Recognition cheat sheet: Proceedings of the SALTO Bridges for Recognition: Promoting recognition of youth work across Europe, Leuven-Louvain.
Colley H., Hodkinson P. and Malcolm J. (2002), “Non-formal learning: mapping the conceptual terrain. A Consultation Report”, University of Leeds Lifelong Learning Institute, Leeds, available at: www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/colley_informal_ learning.htm, accessed 3 August 2012.
Colley H., Hodkinson P. and Malcolm J. (2003), Informality and formality in learning: A report for the Learning and Skills Research Centre, Learning and Skills Research Centre, London, available at www.uk.ecorys.com/europeaninventory/ publications/concept/lsrc_informality_formality_learning.pdf, accessed 3 August 2012. Corladyn D. and Bjornavold J. (2004), “Validation of formal, non-formal and informal learning: policy and practices in EU member states”, European Journal of Education, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 69-90.
European Commission (2009), “Green Paper on promoting the learning mobility of young people”, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=COM:2009:0329:FIN:EN:PDF, accessed 20 July 2012.
European Commission (2001), “Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality”, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri= COM:2001:0678:FIN:EN:PDF, accessed 16 August 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Gibbons M. (2002), The self-directed learning handbook: Challenging adolescent students to excel, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Heron J. (1999), The complete facilitator’s handbook, Kogan Page, London. Hodkinson F., Biesta G. and James D. (2004), Towards a cultural theory of collegebased learning, British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Manchester, available at education.exeter.ac.uk/tlc/docs/publications/Conf/ BERA%2004/ALL_CONF_BERA04_TOWARDSCULTTHEORY_09.04.doc, accessed 1 August 2012. Knowles M. S. (1975), Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers, Prentice Hall/Cambridge, Englewood Cliffs. Marsick V. J., and Watkins K. (2001), “Informal and incidental learning”, Merriam S. B. (ed.), The new update on adult learning theory. New directions for adult and continuing education No. 89, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 25-34.
Youth mobility: towards more self-directed and holistic learning
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
116
Rogers C. (1969), Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become, Charles E. Merrill, Columbus.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Smith M. K. (2003, 2009) “Communities of practice”, The Encyclopedia of informal education, available at www.infed.org/biblio/communities_of_practice.htm, accessed 10 August 2012.
Marta Brzezin´ska-Hubert
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Judith Dubiski
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts D Context
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
W
hat do we already know? This question forms the starting point of every research project. It usually characterises the researcher’s workload during the frst weeks of a project and it is the headline of the frst chapter of most research reports. When framing a research question, interpreting data or revising theories, we usually rely on what has already been accomplished by other researchers. In doing so, it is common practice to consider international research as well as research from various disciplines. However, depending on the particular issue being considered it’s not always that easy to determine the latest state of the art in international research. That seems to be especially true with regard to research on the topic of this publication – although we’re interested in international youth work, we know little about what colleagues from other countries work on, what the dominant questions and problems are or how specifc terms are used in different languages. And there is hardly any source that provides comprehensive information on international research on these questions. To (try to) fll this gap, the European Platform on Learning Mobility in the Youth Field has assigned a research team on non-formal
5
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
118
education at the University of Applied Sciences in Cologne to conduct a systematic literature review on international youth mobility in non-formal educational contexts. The results of this research will be presented in this chapter.
D Methodological approach and research criteria According to Mark Petticrew and Helen Roberts, a systematic literature review is “a method of making sense of large bodies of information … a method of mapping out areas of uncertainty, and identifying where little or no relevant research has been done, but where new studies are needed” (Petticrew and Roberts 2006). To carry out such research, they propose seven steps – from defning the question and the type of studies that are to be considered to the actual literature research, the screening of results, and the critical appraisal of included studies.
Following those stages, the frst step of this literature review was to specify the research question and to defne exclusion criteria. When choosing European research on youth learning mobility and non-formal education as the general topic, it was decided to include research on international youth encounters, work camps, au pairs, voluntary service and trainings for non-professional youth workers, but to exclude studies on exchange programmes for professionals in youth work, higher education and school exchange – except for research on co-operation between the formal and non-formal educational sectors. The review was to cover studies that focus on individual and/or group programmes as well as short-stay and/or long-stay programmes, but limited to research on youth and young adults from 13 to 30 years (according to the guidelines of the Youth in Action Programme). Furthermore, for a study to be considered it had to involve at least one of the “Youth in Action Programme” countries or neighbouring partner countries (European Commission 2012).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The types of studies included in the review comprised evaluation studies as well as genuine research projects from different scientifc disciplines (including theses and dissertations, and other types of grey literature) regardless of the institutional background of the research project. Qualitative and quantitative studies of different research designs, fnished and ongoing projects were to be taken into account, whereas the review was limited to publications not older than 12 years (i.e. projects that were completed in 2000 or later, or are ongoing). Other exclusion criteria, such as representativeness, reception, publication in scientifc journals or peerreviewing were not considered.
The most diffcult part in specifying the research question was to fnd appropriate key words for the search syntax. As Petticrew and Roberts state, sensitivity and specifcity are two core aspects in retrieving relevant material and leaving the rest behind: A highly sensitive search is one that retrieves a high proportion of the relevant studies that are waiting to be retrieved; a highly specifc search is one that retrieves a low proportion of irrelevant studies … The sensitivity and specifcity of particular searches are often not known, because the true number of studies theoretically available for retrieval cannot usually be determined. (Petticrew and Roberts 2006)
To be able to retrieve specifed studies on particular topics as well as rather general research projects, several key words of different levels of abstraction were used. Another problem with fnding key words in an international literature review stems from the different meaning of terms in various countries and disciplines. To avoid this problem as far as possible, terms commonly used in the context of European youth policy were applied as key words in this review:
Judith Dubiski
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
15 119
• learning mobility; • youth mobility; • non-formal education; • learning abroad; • international youth work; • youth exchange/youth encounter; • youth programmes; • international educational exchange; • intercultural learning/intercultural education; • voluntary service(s).
To identify relevant databases, selected researchers from different European countries were asked to name their most important sources. Popular scientifc databases that are usually analysed in German research contexts were also taken into account. Apart from that, Petticrew and Roberts’ book (2006) gave some helpful advice. The actual literature review was conducted in July and August 2012. Using the above-mentioned key words and exclusion criteria, 15 international online databases were systematically scanned.24 Following Petticrew and Roberts (2006), and assuming that there might be quite a lot of small-scale research projects (like Bachelor’s or Master’s theses) which are not registered in scientifc databases (yet), this systematic search was supplemented by a “blind web search” with a metasearch engine (Metacrawler) as well as scanning “Google Scholar”, a non-scientifc search engine specialising in scholarly online data. Due to the researcher’s language skills, abstracts and titles were taken into account only if available in German, English, French or Polish, which in fact covered most of the search results in the international databases.
By searching different international databases with key words of European standard (as mentioned above), the researcher tried to avoid any kind of systematic distortion of the results. Nonetheless, the possibility of a certain bias in favour of sources, persons or topics that are common in the research context in German social sciences cannot be excluded.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Findings The amount of information concerning particular studies available on the Internet varies considerably. In some cases, the whole research report is available for download and sometimes you fnd a detailed abstract in the databases. In other cases, all you get is the title and the author’s name. Thus, it’s not always possible to determine if, for example, two articles or reports refer to the same research project, which countries were involved, what methods were applied or what issue the main focus was on. Considering this, the fndings of this literature review do not claim perfect accuracy. After extracting all studies, which after closer examination of the given information did not apply to all defned criteria, a compilation of 86 studies and research projects remained in the list of fnal results.
24. Those were: DIPF/Perine, Einiras/edn, EPPI Centre database, Eric, GESIS, Ibedocs, IJAB Forschungsdatenbank, SciVerse Science Direct, Scopus, SSOAR, WAO/IBLK, WAO/ireon, Wiso, Youth Partnership database. In addition, Open Grey was scanned in a search for further grey literature.
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
120
Topics Based on the given information, the 86 studies were clustered by the feld(s) of activity they focus on, as illustrated in Figure 1. Since many studies have a wider focus, the total adds up to 126. Figure 1: Number of studies clustered by main feld of action Youth in Action
9
Training
10
Student/school exchange
11
Workcamps
8
International youth exchange
37
Higher education
5
Exchange of professionnals
6
Voluntary service
36
Au pair
4 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
NB: Studies fled under “Youth in Action” do not focus on one sub-action or a single project, but on the whole programme. Categories “student/school exchange”, “higher education” and “exchange of professionals” contain studies that among others deal with those topics or that focus on co-operative projects.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
As Figure 1 shows, the two most frequently studied felds of activity are international youth exchange and voluntary service. Work camps, trainings for non-professional youth workers and au pair programmes in contrast enjoy less attention in research. The most dominant general topic across all felds of study is intercultural learning while questions of political or inter-religious education are of less interest. Issues concerning integration and/or inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities, migrant youth or young people with disabilities are researched with regard to voluntary services as well as to international youth exchanges (Haapanen 2007; Rosenthal 2009; Demirovic 2010). Studies on international youth exchange cover a wide range of aspects surrounding international youth work in educational theory and practice. They often deal with particular issues in bi- or multilateral co-operation (e.g. between Germany and Israel: Heil 2010; Nadan 2006), special target groups (e.g. young Muslims in Great Britain: Moorhead 2010) or specifc types of youth exchanges (e.g. cultural education: Bianchi 2008; Aden 2010; Trunk 2011; or sports: Tyler/Fairley 2009).
Studies on voluntary services often deal with questions of learning effects on a personal and/or professional level (Hedjerassi and Razafndrazaka 2008; Iannone et al. 2010). A particular subset of research projects, especially from Germany, focuses on critical aspects of voluntary services as part of development policy
Judith Dubiski
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
15 121
(Haas 2012; Schwinge 2011; Henn 2001). Several Finnish studies cover the impacts of voluntary service not only on the volunteers’ side, but on the side of the hosting organisations, the youth workers and the local communities (Jyrkka 2012; Tikkakoski 2012). In this context, a study by Steve Powell and Esad Bratovic´ might be especially interesting as it reviews published and unpublished studies on the impact of long-term voluntary service in Europe (Powell and Bratovic´ 2007). While Powell and Bratovic´ take a look back on what has already been explored, Margaret Sherraden, Benjamin Lough and Amanda Moore McBride (all are working in the US, but are also considering the European Voluntary Service) propose a conceptual model for future research on the impact of international voluntary services (Sherraden et al. 2008). A rather unusual perspective seems to have developed in research on au pair programmes. Only one of the studies found focuses on the experiences and learning processes of the participants of au pair programmes (Nothnagel 2005). The other studies take on a less “individual-centred”, rather “political” point of view: Rosie Cox analyses how au pairs are presented in the British press and on au pair placement websites to fnd out how those images affect the au pairs’ life in Great Britain (Cox 2007). Maria Orthofer provides an overview of the historical changes in the role of au pairs in Austria since 1980 in light of political and social developments and how those affect the relationship between au pairs and their hosting families (Orthofer 2009). And Sabine Hess’s study shows how au pair programmes have become a relevant aspect of international migration and of child care systems in the countries of destination (Hess 2005).
These examples illustrate how a particular kind of activity in international youth mobility is embedded in different (pedagogical, social, political, historical, economic, etc.) contexts and how research can take these contexts into account.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Countries involved
As mentioned above, in many cases the available information on research studies is not that extensive. Thus, sometimes it is not even possible to identify the national context(s) a study is embedded in or which country the participants of a survey come from. Figure 2 lists all the countries explicitly mentioned in the 86 studies found – that is, the countries in which studies were conducted and where surveyed youth/professionals/experts come from. Based on the given information, the major part of research on international European youth mobility in non-formal educational contexts is conducted in or refers to Germany, followed by France, Poland, Finland and Great Britain. Presumably, one reason why Germany is so heavily overrepresented is the fact that in many studies which were conducted by German researchers, there was no further information on what other countries were involved or where the surveyed participants came from (in these cases the studies may be counted as “German” even though they might focus on a multinational exchange project). As mentioned above, there could be a methodological explanation behind these fndings. Be that as it may, there is good reason to presume that research on international youth mobility in non-formal educational contexts might attract greater interest among German social scientists than in researchers from other countries.
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
122
Figure 2: Number of studies by the countries they refer to 60 50 40 30 20
0
ZA SLO DK NL GR LUX CH MK TR Palestine BIH CHN E JAP IRL CZ I A RUS S RO ISR EU USA GB FIN PL F D
10
NB: The category “EU” covers studies on the Youth in Action Programme as a whole as well as two studies on “the US and EU” that do not specify which countries in the European Union are involved.
Research institutions, types of studies and methods applied
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The research covers three (not necessarily distinctive) kinds of studies which stem from different institutions. A lot of studies are conducted in university contexts, either as part of a large research project (e.g. the ongoing project on “intercultural moments in biography and the context of the Franco-German Youth Offce”, conducted at the University of Education Karlsruhe, Egloff and Stock 2010), or as dissertations or rather small-scale studies for Master’s and Bachelor’s theses. In the latter case, there often is a particular interest based on a personal experience of one kind or another that constitutes the motivation for the research and provides access to the feld. Another type of studies is (funded and) realised on the initiative of organisations whose working focus usually is on the funding and/or realisation of actual exchange projects and who want to deepen their understanding, improve their work or stimulate refection on what they are doing. They either have the possibility to accomplish an adequate study by themselves (Puls-Janssen et al. 2006; Halabi and Zak 2006) or they engage a researcher (team) to do so (Merl 2012). In this type of research, you fnd evaluation studies of different kinds, but also intense research on the effects of intercultural learning and so on (e.g. Ilg and Dubiski 2011; Thomas et al. 2007; Freise et al. 2010). With a third kind of institutional background, studies are commissioned by diverse institutions on an (inter-)national or European level to gather information upon which “evidence-based policies” can be built. Among these, you will fnd evaluation studies on the Youth in Action Programme (Koppert et al. 2007 for the whole programme, Feldmann-Wojtachnia 2011 for Germany, The Swedish Ministry of Integration and Gender Equality 2007 for Sweden, Da Silva Santos 2010 for Luxembourg), and studies on particular programmes, target groups or aspects of mobility. For example, Mutz and Korfmacher (2003) studied dropouts from the European Voluntary Service on behalf of the German National Agency of the Youth in Action Programme and the Ministry of Families, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (BMFSFJ), and Thimmel, Chehata and Riß guided the scientifc research programme accompanying “JiVE”
Judith Dubiski
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
15 123
(Youth Work International – Experiencing Diversity), a youth policy initiative to promote education and participation through various methods and concepts of international youth work (Chehata et al. 2010).
In terms of methodological approaches, research on international youth mobility in non-formal educational contexts seems to resist the common trend in research on formal education of collecting extensive data through large quantitative surveys: as Figure 3 shows, more than 40% of the studies included in this review apply only qualitative research methods and 23% work with a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. For studies fled under “neither or not specifed” there was no information available on the Internet concerning the applied methods or they were focusing on theoretical aspects (and thus not collecting and using empirical data at all, see Winkelmann 2006). There were only fve studies using exclusively quantitative methods, of which one was a psychological study from Austria on the effects of international voluntary services on the volunteers’ personality (Thalhammer 2012), and another was a survey on the educational and occupational benefts gained by young people from Poland involved in EVS (Moskwiak 2005). Figure 3: Studies by methods applied 40 35
37
30 25 24 20
20
15 10 5
5
0
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Qualitative
Quantitative
Both
Neither or not specified
D Conclusions and unsolved questions This literature review was conducted in order to get a more comprehensive picture of what has already been accomplished in research on international youth mobility in non-formal educational contexts. Apart from numerous hints on interesting research projects and new perspectives on particular topics, this research leads to several rather general conclusions. The wide range of issues, approaches and methods found in the included studies refects the diverse realm of international youth mobility in non-formal educational contexts. However, compared to research on mobility in formal educational contexts – especially school exchange and higher education mobility programmes like Erasmus or Socrates – there seems to be much less research on youth mobility in non-formal education.
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
124
The reinforcement of international and interdisciplinary networking would help to initiate and maintain a broader discussion on the issues in question and to develop an independent research discourse. At the same time, research has to become more visible on an international level. A fundamental task that would build the basis for any future discourse is to clearly establish which terms we use in which way. The review showed for example that “learning mobility” – the term used at EU levels to describe the entire feld of youth mobility in educational contexts – in many databases refers exclusively to student mobility in higher education, while “youth mobility” is used for social mobility and has nothing to do with young people’s travelling. The term “voluntary service” often refers to volunteer work in the community or in contexts of volunteering in developing countries. In some databases “nonformal education” is mainly referred to as adult education in contexts of literacy education or educational projects for street children. Apparently, there still is a lot to discuss and to clarify on a European/international level with regard to defnitions and terminology in order to create a common space for research and discourse. Hopefully, the European Platform on Learning Mobility in the Youth Field and this book will help to do so.
D References Aden J. (2010), Theaterspielen als Chance in der interkulturellen Begegnung/ Rencontre interculturelle autour de pratiques théâtrales, Schibri-Verlag, Milow. Bianchi J. (2008), “More than a body’s work: Widening cultural participation through an international exploration of young people’s construction of visual image and identity”, International Journal of Art & Design Education, 27(3), pp. 293-308. Chehata Y., Riß K. and Thimmel A. (2011), Interkulturelle Öffnung der internationalen Jugendarbeit, Gesamtbericht der wissenschaftlichen Begleitung zum Modellprojekt JiVE “Jugendarbeit international – Vielfalt erleben”, Fachhochschule, Köln, available at www.f01.fh-koeln.de/imperia/md/content/personen/a.thimmel/thimmel.pdf, accessed 5 February 2013.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Da Silva Santos C. (2010), Évaluation intermédiare du programme “Jeunesse en action” (2007-2012) au Luxembourg, University of Luxembourg, available at wwwde.uni.lu/forschung/fshase/study_centre_cesije/publications, accessed 30 August 2012.
Demirovic A. (2010), “Politisch (ein-)gebildet in der Internationalen Jugendarbeit? Chancen und Grenzen der politischen Bildung mit sozial benachteiligten Jugendlichen in der Internationalen Jugendarbeit”, IJAB – Fachstelle für Internationale Jugendarbeit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. (eds) (2010), Forum Jugendarbeit International 2008-2010. Internationale Jugendarbeit und Chancengleichheit, IJAB, Bonn, pp. 398-411.
Egloff B. and Stock E. (2010), “Von (un)sichtbaren Spuren und Standorten: methodologische Refexionen über ein deutsch-französisches Biographieforschungsprojekt”, Synergies Pays Germanophones 3, pp. 27-49. European Commission (2012), Youth in Action Programme Guide, available at http://ec.europa.eu/youth/documents/programme-guide-2012_en.pdf, accessed 9 July 2012.
Judith Dubiski
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
15 125
Feldmann-Wojtachnia E., Otten H. and Tham B. (2011), Unter der Lupe. Wirkungen und Effekte des EU-Programms “Jugend in Aktion”, Jugend in Aktion, Bonn, München, available at www.jugendfuereuropa.de/news/7620/, accessed 25 August 2012.
Freise J., Alter J. and Volkmann U. E. (2011), Partizipative und transkulturelle Qualitätsentwicklung im Evangelischen Forum entwicklungspolitischer Freiwilligendienst (eFeF) beim Förderprogramm ‘weltwärts’, Katholische Hochschule NRW/eFeF, Köln/Bonn. Haapanen S. (2007), Inclusion work: Immigrant youth in voluntary service. A case study on organisations’ intercultural competence, AVSO – Association of Voluntary Service Organisations, Brussels, available at www.avso.org/activities/Research/ AVSO_Research_Intercultural_Competence_VS.pdf, accessed 23 August 2012. Haas B. (2012), Ambivalenz der Gegenseitigkeit - Reziprozitätsformen des weltwärtsFreiwilligendienstes im Spiegel der Postkolonialen Theorie, Kölner Wissenschaftsverlag, Köln.
Halabi R. and Zak M. (2006), Youth encounters at the School for Peace. School for Peace Neve Shalom/ Wahat al Salam, available at http://sfpeace.org/index.php?_ lang=en&page=article&id=164&_ section=publication, accessed 23 August 2012.
Hedjerassi N. and Razafndrazaka F. (2008), “SVE: Mobilité et Construction de Soi”, Agora débats/jeunesse, 50, pp. 140-5. Heil S. (2010), Young ambassadors: youth exchange and the special relationship between Germany and the state of Israel, Nomos, Bremen. Henn Ch. (2001), Workcamps: Dritte-Welt-Tourismus einmal anders oder echte Chance für die Jugendpädagogik? Eine empirische Untersuchung, IKO-Verlag, Frankfurt/M.
Hess S. (2005), Globalisierte Hausarbeit. Au-pair als Migrationsstrategie von Frauen aus Osteuropa, VS-Verlag, Wiesbaden.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Iannone R. L., Procter K. and Skrypnyk O. (2010), “Signifcant learning in intercultural contexts: a closer look on European volunteers”, Korhonen V. (ed.), Cross-cultural lifelong learning, University Press, Tampere, pp. 103-34. Ilg W. and Dubiski J. (2011), Begegnung schafft Perspektiven. Empirische Einblicke in internationale Jugendbegegnungen, Deutsch-Französisches Jugendwerk und Deutsch-Polnisches Jugendwerk, Berlin/Potsdam/Paris/Warschau, available at www.eijb.eu/de/downloads, accessed 2 February 2013.
Jyrkkä H. (2012), EVS-vapaaehtoinen kotikansainvälisyyden edistäjänä: Kokemuksia yhdeksän kunnan [EVS volunteers promoting home internationalism – Experiences from nine municipalities], Humank University of Applied Sciences, Helsinki, available at http://publications.theseus.f/bitstream/handle/10024/44527/Jyrkka_ Heidi.pdf?sequence=1, accessed 20 August 2012.
Koppert S. et al. (2007), Final external evaluation of the YOUTH Community Action Programme 2000-2006. Final Report, ECORYS Nederland BV, Rotterdam, available at www.nji.nl/youthinaction/download/documenten/report_youth_en%5B1%5D. pdf, accessed 20 August 2012.
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
126
Merl Th. (2012), “Projektevaluation SchulBrücke Europa – Internationale Jugendbegegnung und europapolitische Bildung”, IJAB – Fachstelle für Internationale Jugendarbeit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. (eds) (2012), Forum Jugendarbeit International 2011/2012. Internationale Jugendarbeit und ihre Bildungswirkungen, IJAB, Bonn, pp. 124-36. Moorhead G. et al. (2010), Young Muslims and youth exchange opportunities. UK Youth Research Project – Our Shared Europe, British Council, London, available at www.oursharedeurope.org/ documents/uk_youth_research_2010_full_report.pdf, accessed 20 August 2012.
Moskwiak A. (2005), “Learning and recognition of voluntary activities”, Williamson H., Hoskins B. and Boetzelen P. (eds), Charting the landscape of European youth voluntary activities, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, pp.145-56, available at http://youth-partnership-eu.coe.int/youth-partnership/documents/EKCYP/Youth_ Policy/docs/Voluntary/Research/2005_charting_landscape_voluntary_coepub. pdf#page=145, accessed 27 August 2012.
Mutz G. and Korfmacher S. (2003), Grenzerfahrungen. Abbrecherinnen und Abbrecher im Europäischen Freiwilligendienst, Jugend in Aktion, Bonn, available at www.jugendpolitikineuropa.de/beitrag/grenzerfahrungen-abbrecherinnen-undabbrecher-im-europaeischen-freiwilligendienst.6380/, accessed 21 August 2012. Nadan Y. (2006), German-Israeli youth exchange as a tool for long-term peacebuilding, Technische Fachhochschule, Berlin.
Nothnagel S. (2005), Spuren eines Auslandsaufenthaltes im Leben und in Lebensentwürfen junger Erwachsener, available at http://monarch.qucosa.de/ fleadmin/data/qucosa/documents/5644/data/nothnagel.pdf, accessed 13 August 2012.
Orthofer M. (2009), Au-pair: von der Kulturträgerin zum Dienstmädchen, die moderne Kleinfamilie als Bildungsbörse und Arbeitsplatz, Böhlau-Verlag, Wien.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Petticrew M. and Roberts H. (2006), Systematic reviews in the social sciences. A practical guide, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, available at http://xa.yimg.com/kq/ groups/18751725/462617161/name/manalysis.pdf, accessed 22 July 2012. Powell S. and Bratovic´ E. (2007), The impact of long-term youth voluntary service in Europe: A review of published and unpublished research studies, available at www.promente.org/userfles/proMENTE%20AVSO%20effects%20of%20youth%20 volunteering.pdf, accessed 13 August 2012.
Puls-Janssen K., Spaight F. and Bober I. (2006), “How did international youth work affect your life?”, A report on the effectiveness of international youth work, Europa Haus & Przjaciele, Aurich, available at www.europe-direct-aurich.de/fleadmin/ user_upload/Bilder/studie_how_did-international_en.pdf, accessed 20 August 2012. Rosenthal A. (2009), Empirische Untersuchung über den Zugang zum Programm Jugend in Aktion, Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, available at www.ijab.de/ forschung/forschungsdatenbank/f/show/?tx_ijabresearch_main[research]=156&c Hash=bf09a897134b07cdb6e560808826137b, accessed 21 August 2012.
Judith Dubiski
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
15 127
Schwinge B. (2011), Verkehrte Welten: Über die Umkehrung der Verhältnisse von Geben und Nehmen. Der weltwärts-Freiwilligendienst als Selbstbehandlung im Kulturkontakt zwischen Deutschland und Südafrika, Band 1, Interdisziplinäre Studien zu Freiwilligendiensten, Bonn.
Sherraden M. S., Lough B. and Moore McBride A. (2008), “Effects of international volunteering and service: individual and institutional predictors”, Voluntas, 19, pp. 395-421, available at www.springerlink.com/content/g37141p3062722n4/ fulltext.pdf, accessed 20 August 2012. Thalhammer M. (2012), “‘Du hast Dich aber verändert!’? – Eine Längsschnittstudie zur Auswirkung internationaler Freiwilligendienste auf die Persönlichkeit”, IJAB – Fachstelle für Internationale Jugendarbeit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. (eds) (2012), Forum Jugendarbeit International 2011/2012. Internationale Jugendarbeit und ihre Bildungswirkungen, IJAB, Bonn, pp. 449-55.
The Swedish Ministry of Integration and Gender Equality (2007), Evaluation of the EU Youth Programme, available at www.ungdomsstyrelsen.se/ad2/user_documents/ evaluation_of_the_eu_youth_programme.pdf, accessed 13 August 2012. Thomas A., Chang C. and Abt H. (2007), Erlebnisse, die verändern – Langzeitwirkungen der Teilnahme an internationalen Jugendbegegnungen, Vandenhoeck u. Ruprecht, Göttingen.
Tikkakoski T. (2012), The impact of the EVS-volunteer to the culture identity of the members of their work community, Humak University of Applied Sciences, Helsinki, available at http://publications.theseus.f/bitstream/handle/10024/42651/ OpinnaytetyoTyttiTikkakoski.pdf?sequence=1, accessed 20 August 2012.
Trunk W. (2011), Voneinander lernen – Kunstvermittlung im Kontext kultureller Diversität, available at www.ifa.de/fleadmin/pdf/edition/kunstvermittlung.pdf, accessed 14 August 2012. Tyler D. and Fairley S. (2009), “Cultural learning through a sport tourism experience: The role of the group”, Journal of Sport & Tourism, 14(4), pp. 273-92.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Winkelmann A. (2006), Internationale Jugendarbeit in der Einwanderungsgesellschaft. Auf dem Weg zu einer theoretischen Fundierung, Wochenschau, Schwalbach/Ts.
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
III
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Good practice and project reports
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Nagla Abed, Judith van Raalten
European youth mobility and inclusion among those with fewer opportunities through three mechanisms D Challenges
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
I
n Europe, a ffth of the population are young people. This makes for close to 100 million young people who face higher unemployment rates and diffculties in their personal and professional growth (European Commission 2010a). It is easy enough to defne youth by age, but it becomes more problematic to defne “young people of fewer opportunities” as it is a very diverse group (Ritzen J. et al. 2000; European Youth Centre 2011; European Commission 2011). Their exclusion often has an economic dimension, whereby they face unemployment, are deprived from an income, have a low standard of living and often are denied access to services such as receiving credit or owning property. With regard to the social dimension, young people face the loss of social status within society due to circumstances such as family disturbances, disabilities, health-related problems, drug abuse and risky sexual behaviours. Their exclusion can be political, often understood within a cultural dimension, when a sense of belonging to a particular ethnic or linguistic group can result in discrimination and marginalisation in civic and political participation, deprivation of minority rights and often, blame for problems faced by the
6
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
132
majority population. Lastly, exclusion can have a developmental dimension, whereby young people’s exclusion is due to restricted access to governmental resources and services such as infrastructure, health facilities, housing and transportation. Young people with fewer opportunities face higher motivational obstacles than their peers, and have more need of support, direction and guidance to make the mobility experience a valuable one.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
For example, the European Voluntary Service (EVS) Programme sends many young people across European borders to volunteer with hosting organisations. However, the majority of EVS volunteers are university graduates with a Bachelor’s or Master’s degree, and it remains “primarily the privilege of the upper social class, not only in terms of education but also based on the height of income” (Committee of Regions 2009). Many European young people are not aware of the European mobility programmes they can take part in. A representative of an active non-proft organisation in the Czech Republic recalled the time when a group of young people did not believe that they could be part of a European mobility programme, in this case a Youth in Action Youth Exchange to Spain, and accused the organisation of being a sect trying to lure them in.25 A Danish colleague from a well-respected internationally active non-proft organisation pointed out that Danish young people with immigrant backgrounds are often eager to attend mobility programmes but encounter resistance at home, with parents refusing to allow their participation. Disadvantaged young people can beneft greatly from further inclusion in mobility programmes funded by European institutions. This is not only to give every young European, regardless of his/her background or situation, a chance to increase his/ her personal and professional development, but also because of the enormous benefts that young people with fewer opportunities enjoy once they are motivated to participate. A mobility experience for disadvantaged young people often results in unexpected active participation and smoother (re)integration into their societies.
This chapter addresses how European mobility programmes as outlined in the Europe 2020 strategy can be further improved to include more young people with fewer opportunities (European Commission 2010b). The report of the impact assessment of the Youth in Action programmes pointed out that the measures aimed at encouraging the participation of young people with fewer opportunities need to be strengthened (European Commission 2011). We propose the development of three mechanisms: frst, we propose a well-functioning supportive system with an inclusion quota for mobility programmes per country; second, we propose to strengthen promotion strategies to extend the outreach to relevant stakeholders, including close family members of disadvantaged young people, potential employers and untapped youth networks; and third, we propose to specifcally focus on the importance of the informal learning process that facilitates the inclusion of the younger generations from disadvantaged minority communities. With these measures active citizenship among young people with fewer opportunities is promoted, their employability is advanced and they are brought out of their isolation.
D Inclusion quota The current European Youth in Action (YiA) Programme uses an inclusion strategy for youth organisations, youth councils and others to get extra fnancial assistance for their YiA events to stimulate social inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities. The inclusion strategy will continue to apply under the Europe 2020 strategy, in the 25. Interview with non-proft organisation representative from the Czech Republic over the phone on 5 November 2012.
Nagla Abed, Judith van Raalten
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
16 133
frame of the Youth on the Move fagship initiative (European Commission 2011). Such a supportive system is vital for all elements of “Youth on the Move” to guarantee more participation from young people with fewer opportunities, and could mature into a full-fedged system that guarantees systematic preparation and follow-up to encourage active participation of young people coming from marginalised communities. We propose a quota per European country that reserves spots for young people from marginalised communities to participate in European mobility programming such as the initiative “Your frst EURES job”, which fnds young job seekers work in other EU countries (European Commission 2010b). Young people with fewer opportunities can beneft from an inclusion quota to increase their chance to be recruited outside their home country. The quota is not just a number, but is an essential part of the supportive system that is tailored to each individual country context and its marginalised communities. The quota guarantees that a more representative sample of young people is involved. The quota is only possible if it is backed by a thorough supportive system to facilitate inclusion through access, reliable and helpful information, and the needed fnancial backup. Five elements are needed to maintain the quota per country.
First, a yearly contextual assessment of marginalised young people and their communities, which includes the organisations that are effectively reaching out, and those that could potentially do so. It should also map out the heterogeneity of the group of those with fewer opportunities. The contextual analysis is needed on a yearly basis to adjust the objectives, target those who need it most, and it provides the tools to improve the inclusion of marginalised young people.
Second, language assistance packages within each host country, including minilanguage courses, translation efforts and language buddies before and during the mobility experience, to help participants practise a second language and become familiar with the foreign language used in the country of exchange. One of the main obstacles is language; those without language skills are easily intimidated and afraid to be part of an international activity with hardly any basic foreign-language skills.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Third, encourage minimum language programmes. Young people from marginalised communities can be involved in mobility programmes with a focus on sports, music, theatre, and hands-on vocational activities where language requirements are reduced to a minimum. Fourth, make use of “virtual mobility”, with guidance and distribution of information in print and online. Mentors and co-ordinators of mobility programmes need to be up to date and comfortable with the wealth of information available related to the mobility programme they are in charge of, and reach out to participants during the preparation phase and during the mobility experience regularly to share sources and practical tips on issues such as housing, transportation, language, visa and money issues, as well as the contact information of the host institution. Virtual mobility should be better streamlined on the organisational side, not only before the mobility experience but also afterwards. Employees who provide guidance should play a bigger role in alleviating reverse culture shocks and reach out to participants to share and acknowledge their experience. On a yearly basis, involved employees should have the responsibility of verifying and updating all information. Participants should also have the option to connect with a “buddy” who has experience in a mobility programme, preferably in the same country. The buddy is met beforehand, and is a resource for questions before and after the programme. Cultural
European youth mobility and inclusion among those with fewer opportunities
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
134
tips and the shared stories of a young person with a previous mobility experience can help participants prepare for cultural differences and deal with culture shock. The “buddy” has the chance to share his/her own stories, facilitating the recognition of the value of his/her own mobility experience.
Fifth, fnancial assistance to involved organisations choosing to contribute to the quota is needed to cover the extra costs of mentoring, extra preparations and follow-up schemes. More structural fnancial assistance is needed to ensure that organisations provide the necessary support needed to reach out to marginalised young people and offer them the needed preparations and follow-up. Preparation costs need to be budgeted in the Youth in Action schemes, so that non-proft organisations can provide language courses and trainings to prepare young people for participation in group activities, introduce them to cross-cultural differences and support them in getting ready to take part in an international activity.
D Outreach: promotion of mobility
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
European mobility programmes can beneft signifcantly from greater outreach initiatives. It is a win-win situation: local communities recognise the efforts of those who participated, more employers understand the added value of young people with this experience, and more marginalised young people and their families can be reached to learn about future mobility opportunities that can strongly enhance their personal lives and professional careers. It is vital for more people and organisations to become familiar with the main advantages of EU mobility experiences: this increases the support of families to their children’s participation in mobility programmes, and increases their employability, in addition to personal development (European Commission 2008). Young people participating in mobility programmes often have access to other youth networks that otherwise remain untapped. Learning mobility programmes can put more effort into the period after the mobility experience, when the participants can share their stories, receive recognition for participation in their local communities, and open the eyes of their peers about the possibilities of going abroad to enrich their lives. With only minimal to no follow-up, participants who want to make a difference in their local communities sometimes cannot fnd a platform to be active. The empowerment of their mobility experience can diminish quickly if there is no platform from which to share their experiences and enable others to learn about opportunities they can apply for and take part in. While there are active alumni organisations such as the Erasmus Mundus Students and Alumni Association, several mobility programmes lack alumni activities and could beneft from a structured approach to reach out and promote the European mobility programmes, and to share their experience with others: peers, parents, as well as the educational and business sectors. The peer-to-peer approach is ideal for using the right arguments and cultural sensitivities to make the mobility programmes known and attractive to young people with fewer opportunities. For example, a Comenius Programme in Romania and Hungary that took place back in 2005 and 2006 focused on the improvement of language and communication skills of high school students through debate. The students came from towns and villages in Romania and Hungary, and several students came from remote rural areas and underdeveloped farm villages. All students participated on an equal level, interacting with and learning from each other. Eight years on, two participating students continue to be involved in public speaking and debate, and run successful training programmes in debate for young people in Romania.26 26. Interview on 11 November 2012 with a programme co-ordinator of debate programmes in Romania who participated in the Comenius Programme.
Nagla Abed, Judith van Raalten
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
16 135
Promoting mobility programmes in a structural way, as a joint effort throughout EU mobility programming, will diminish the lack of knowledge about the advantages of learning mobility. We propose a joint effort to undertake the following three promotion strategies.
First, the implementation of local “mobility interest teams” in each country gives mobility benefciaries the possibility to introduce mobility programmes to their networks, with the support of the EU and local authorities.
The “mobility interest team” consists of formal educational bodies such as schools, training centres and universities, and civil society organisations that work in the non-formal educational sector; companies with corporate social responsibility programmes; and the mobility benefciaries, to whom members of alumni organisations, teachers, trainers, activists and coordinators can actively reach out in advocating for mobility (European Commission 2010a). The mobility interest team can offer the mobility benefciaries the missing and needed structural links to strengthen the visibility and recognition of mobility programmes. A participant of a mobility experience can function as an ambassador for his/her mobility programme in local schools and universities and local radio stations, public venues and other media outlets to add an extra dimension to learned skills and development. This contributes to his/her CV and ensures deserved recognition by society, while at the same time it can provide a connection to young people with fewer opportunities in their local communities. Also, educational institutions, where there is already a bond between the families of the marginalised young people, can gain the needed trust of the parents and positively infuence the lives of minority young people. Educational institutions can facilitate the exchange as a high-quality experience whereby the student is exposed to a new language and to different values. Moreover, the student can share stories of his/her own experience and get recognition for participation in the mobility programme once back in the local community.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The second strategy involves the development of peer-to-peer tools by young benefciaries to access untapped youth networks, in collaboration with group members of the local mobility interest groups (European Commission 2008). Young benefciaries who have participated in a learning mobility project not only have the knowledge but also the motivation to act as mobility promoters, being natural and approachable ambassadors as they are able to speak the same language and use social media to share their experiences with friends who are not directly affliated to mobility programmes. This method can also be used to directly reach families of marginalised young people, especially those from ethnic minorities. Young people from those groups often have to counter the negative perceptions of their families regarding the concept of volunteering and exchange. It is vital to investigate the views of minorities with regard to education, studying abroad, cultural exchange, volunteerism and non-formal activities, and break existing taboos among young people and their elders through promotion strategies. Third, designed programmes should not only make an effort to ensure innovation, but also justify how proposed designs ensure that young people not directly affliated with mobility projects are included in new mobility experiences. Proposed mobility projects should include a “promotion” component where activities such as sharing participants’ experiences with community-based organisations and universities and through social media are part of the project in-country and outcountry. The programme, host institution or affliated home institutions can invite participants to become promoters of their programme.
European youth mobility and inclusion among those with fewer opportunities
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
136
Young people with fewer opportunities do not have the same access to these mobility experiences as their peers from middle and upper social classes. Structural promotion and outreach efforts of learning mobility can have a high impact. It connects the non-formal education sector with the formal one, and boosts learning mobility in all parts of education.
D Greater focus on non-formal learning by means of an inclusive approach The non-formal learning process is invaluable in bringing marginalised young people back into society and ensuring their active participation through local ownership across the involved groups. Non-formal learning creates the opportunity to easily build connections that provide a basis for co-operation in the future. The Europe 2020 strategy aims at promoting the recognition of non-formal and informal learning (European Commission 2010b). Promotion is vital, according to the spokesperson of an Italian non-proft organisation active in Sicily, as non-formal learning techniques are solid instruments to bring these young people at risk in contact with society, increase their sense of belonging and break down existing negative stereotypes and prejudices. Including the marginalised means that they are involved in activities with young people in better social, economic or political situations. By means of an inclusive approach, new relations are established and nurtured, and in connection with their peers, young people are given the opportunity to transfer knowledge to each other.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
This inclusive approach for disadvantaged young people to participate on the same level as their peers can be applied regionally, across borders, but can also be applied locally, within local communities introducing mobility at a local level. This creates local opportunities for mobility, where local minorities can play a role in sharing best practices and transfer knowledge between Europeans, neighbours, minorities and their local community. Young people from the community can participate in local mobility programmes with other young people growing up in ethnic minority communities in their countries, share their expertise on integration issues, share their personal stories and be the driving force in advocating the needs of those communities and opening the eyes of others on other cultural traditions, practices and beliefs. Members of the minority groups build interdependent relations with others and receive recognition from different groupings and stakeholders, and create positive images of an inclusive society that everyone shares and contributes to. Their overall greater involvement as trainers, researchers, youth activists, and active members in organisations, committees and councils will foster cultural diversity, a shared European identity and a basis to connect to minority young people that was previously inaccessible. Young people with fewer opportunities beneft greatly from an inclusive approach whereby they are at the same level as their peers, experience new relationships, build new skill sets and deepen their breadth of knowledge. Someone with fewer opportunities who does not fnish high school or has no sense of career plans, for example, can by taking part in the European Voluntary Service experience a frsttime work experience and become more attractive to prospective employers.
D Conclusion The EU calls for greater co-operation between youth policies and relevant policy areas, in particular education, employment, social inclusion, culture and health (European Commission 2010b). The inclusion of people with fewer opportunities and the inclusion of the benefciaries of diverse backgrounds into mobility activities, such as “Your frst EURES job” and Erasmus Mundus, is key to strengthening and changing culture in the respective countries, thus working towards a long-term
Nagla Abed, Judith van Raalten
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
16 137
vision of change for the betterment of Europe. Education and employment are primary contributors to socially cohesive societies through transfer of knowledge and frst-hand personal experiences of diversity and tolerance. European transnational mobility programmes are long-term educational interventions that advance the skill sets of young Europeans and contribute to their personal development and professional growth. They strengthen their employability and provide life-enriching opportunities. The EU, with its Youth on the Move fagship project, strongly focuses on the added value of mobility in terms of employability, especially with the launch of a youth employment framework for youth to easily enter the job market. A nonformal, inclusive approach can create valuable experiences for young people with fewer opportunities in order to ensure the security and stability of Europe in times of fnancial crises and growing racism. Interaction with peers builds solidarity and understanding among the younger generations, which is a fertile ground for co-operation, interdependence and socially cohesive societies.
We proposed to take into consideration three main mechanisms that focus on a non-formal approach to mobility when integrating and enhancing the EU’s mobility programmes.
The frst is an inclusion quota, which increases the number of benefciaries and the quality of non-formal educational initiatives by means of a full-fedged supportive system. Inclusion is not only about including a higher number of young people, but should be better facilitated and mentored to seamlessly mainstream inclusion. The second mechanism is a stronger outreach component that promotes nonformal initiatives by creating more recognition in society at large, and in particular, delivering added value to employers through mobility interest teams and a peerto-peer approach. The co-operation and empowerment of the benefciaries is key to a sustainable, successful promotion of the programmes.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Third, there should be a greater focus on non-formal learning with the help of an inclusive process. A greater focus on minority groups with non-formal education can help young people with fewer opportunities to participate in the suggested regional and local mobility actions, ensuring local ownership and breaking taboos through non-formal mobility experiences (European Commission 2011). By means of these three mechanisms, we aim to make education, employment and training more relevant to the needs of young people and increase the number of young people with fewer opportunities taking advantage of student mobility and trainee mobility programmes. Learning mobility programmes and non-formal learning are two key instruments of inclusive growth with the help of which marginalised young people are motivated to become active members of their society. Boosting their educational experience and improving their employability empowers young people with fewer opportunities to fully participate in society. The main lesson is that mobility programmes strongly contribute to the local participation and integration of marginalised young people. Giving those young people a place among their peers helps to break down stereotypes, gives peers the opportunity to educate each other and can lead to unexpected positive results once they are back in their communities. These concrete proposals are in line with the Youth on the Move fagship of the European Commission and the Council Resolution of 27 November 2009 on a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth feld (2010-2018) (European Commission 2010a). It is vital for the forthcoming set of policy initiatives of the Youth on the Move programme to be all-inclusive: to address the existing
European youth mobility and inclusion among those with fewer opportunities
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
138
structural inequalities, strengthen social connections and co-operation between young people, develop the capacities of young people with fewer opportunities from marginalised communities to build inclusive societies, and provide everyone, including young people at risk, with access to opportunities and a fairer distribution of resources and assets.
D References Committee of Regions (2009), “Mobility of young volunteers across Europe”, Report.
European Commission (2008), “Report of the High Level Expert Forum on Mobility. Making learning mobility an opportunity for all”, available at http://ec.europa.eu/ education/doc/2008/mobilityreport_en.pdf, accessed 2 December 2012. European Commission (2010a), “Youth on the Move”, Brussels Communication 15 September 2010, COM (2010) 477 fnal. European Commission (2010b), “Europe 2020, a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth”, Brussels Communication 3 March 2010, COM (2010) 2020 fnal.
European Commission (2011), “Commission staff working paper ‘Impact assessment on youth actions’”, Brussels 23 November 2011, SEC (2011) 1402 fnal. European Youth Centre (2011), “Mobility of young people – Opportunities and obstacles for cross-border volunteering for young people, particularly with fewer opportunities”, Seminar 11 to 13 December 2011.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Ritzen J., Easterly W., and Woolcock M. J. V. (2000), “On ‘good’ politicians and ‘bad’ policies: Social cohesion, institutions, and growth”, World Bank, Washington DC.
Nagla Abed, Judith van Raalten
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens
Sharing the mobility experience: creating more effect. Comparison of the effects on young people of two Dutch learning mobility programmes D Introduction
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
T
he Netherlands Youth Institute was responsible for the development and implementation of the national programme for learning mobility Xplore (2005-09), which subsidised internships and volunteering work in developing countries. Though a learning mobility programme, the emphasis of the Xplore programme was on sharing the mobility experience with a wider audience, for example through presentations, theatre, workshops and so on. In this chapter, we will look into the added value of “sharing the mobility experience”. Therefore, we will compare the results of the Xplore programme on the knowledge, attitude and behaviour of young people with the results of the Youth in Action Programme. We will then argue that including a strong dissemination component could be useful for other mobility programmes as well.
D Results of the Dutch learning mobility programme Xplore
7
Framework
In 2005, the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs launched the new learning mobility programme Xplore. The programme, with a total budget of
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
140
€20 million, aimed at funding internships in developing countries for at least 1 300 young people a year. The programme was an answer to the increasing demand in Dutch society for short internships and volunteering work in developing countries. Also, the Dutch Minister for Development Co-operation at the time, Agnes van Ardenne, attached particular importance to the “socialisation” of development co-operation through the participation of civilians in promoting international co-operation. This was one of the cornerstones of her policy on development co-operation (Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2003).
The policy framework for the Xplore programme clearly stated that mobility in itself was not the main goal. The internships were merely a means of promoting support for development co-operation in Dutch society. The emphasis of the Xplore programme was on sharing the mobility experience with a wider audience, for example through presentations, theatre or workshops, aiming at a broad increase for support for development co-operation. Indicators for increased support among the participants were their involvement in volunteering work, their educational and professional choices and their consumption patterns. Another key element in the policy framework was the involvement of young persons from all parts of society. Young people from 13 to 30 years old could participate in the programme. Programme output Between 2005 and 2009, almost 7 500 young people of an average age of 20 participated in the programme. They travelled to a developing country, lived and worked together with local young people, and were stimulated to rethink the concept of development co-operation. Back in the Netherlands, they shared their experiences with 1.3 million Dutch people.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Their activities in developing countries were diverse, such as teaching in schools, working in hospitals, organising sports activities, participation in educational projects aimed at raising awareness on topics such as HIV/Aids, creative activities such as making theatre or music, and research activities. The activities the participants set up to share their experiences back home in the Netherlands varied enormously as well, and ranged from presentations in schools, organising activities in their own neighbourhood (youth centre, sports club, church, bar, etc.) to interactive workshops in elderly homes, photo exhibitions in libraries, flm nights, pub quizzes, debates, auctions and themed dinners. The young people involved were obliged to share their experience in a developing country with at least 150 people through face-to-face contact. Though participants did not particularly look forward to these “sharing activities”, most of them learned to like it. The organisations involved reported that their initial resistance was usually caused by a lack of self-esteem or fear of speaking in public. With appropriate training and preparation, the sharing activities led to more satisfaction and deeper awareness of the issues involved. This was supported by statistics: on average the participants shared their experience with an audience of 180 people, far more than the compulsory 150 (NJi 2009). A simple calculation shows that in total 1.3 million people were reached with the programme.
The aim to recruit at least 40% young people with a low education level or little affnity with the subject of international co-operation was surpassed: 57% of the participants came from the less privileged parts of society. The applications for the programme came from a wide range of organisations, as shown in Table 1, thereby reaching a diversity of young people (IOB 2008).
Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
17 141
Table 1: Main aims of the organisations applying for the programme Development co-operation
23%
Migrant organisation
15%
Internships and volunteering work
15%
Youth organisation
15%
Education
15%
Religious institution
6%
Youth work
6%
Cultural institution
4%
Source: NJi 2009
Outcomes for young people The learning mobility experience in a developing country made a deep impression on most of the young people involved. This not only led to a stronger involvement with development co-operation, but also to personal development. The Xplore programme has been extensively evaluated as per its effects on knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of the participants. The programme has a strong effect on the behaviour of the participants in relation to global citizenship, for example on consumption patterns, donations and volunteering work. Also, positive effects on social and communicative competences are acknowledged.
In 2007, the internal evaluation bureau of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (IOB) performed a mid-term evaluation on 46 Xplore projects (IOB 2008), for which 366 questionnaires were completed. The level of involvement of the participants with development co-operation was measured, as well as the effects on their personal development. Table 2: Percentage of young people reporting a positive effect with Xplore, mid-term
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Knowledge on development co-operation Social skills
80-82% 71%
Source: IOB 2008
At the end of the programme period in 2009, another review was done on the level of the participants, and 168 young people completed a questionnaire. Direct questions related to effects on concrete behaviours were asked, with positive results.
Sharing the mobility experience: creating more effect
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
142
Table 3: Percentage of young people reporting a positive effect with Xplore, post-programme Affnity with development co-operation
90%
Expected involvement in development co-operation in the future
71%
Purchase of fair trade products
32%
Donating money for development projects
30%
Organisation of (local) activities for young people
27%
Infuence on (professional) education
21%
Membership of an organisation related to development work
18%
Source: Nji 2009
Sharing the learning mobility experience In qualitative evaluations with the participants as well as the organisations involved, a link was established between the learning mobility experience in itself and sharing the experience with a wider audience. Sharing their experience seems to make young people more aware of their own personal growth and also stimulates social and organisational skills, according to both organisations and participants (NJi 2007): Being an “ambassador for development co-operation” has helped me to not only relive the experience, but also write and tell people about it. It tought me to be concrete and to be more aware. I cannot leave Brazil behind and continue to live as I have done. Brazil is sketched into my heart. Participant, learning mobility project Livingstone
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
When I come back, I am going to fnish writing my thesis. Also, I will give presentations for my fellow students. I will tell them about my research and show them that they could also do something like this. I am also active as a volunteer for the organisation Enviu. I love telling about my experience in Chile. I write a blog regularly, and maybe I am also going to write for the University paper. I am pretty busy with it, but I learn from it, too. Participant, learning mobility project Enviu We have to invest much time and energy into motivating and supporting the participants to share their experiences. Every week, we come together with all participants. They tell the group about their sharing activities that week. They practise their presentations and give and receive feedback. Thereby, they practise how to present themselves, also for future job applications. Project co-ordinator, learning mobility organisation Welfare Scheveningen Foundation
The “sharing” part of the Xplore programme seems to amount to more than the promotion of support for development co-operation. It deepens the learning mobility experience in its own right (IOB 2008).
Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
17 143
For a more in-depth analysis of the value of the concept of sharing a learning mobility experience, we will look into the results of another learning mobility programme in the Netherlands, the Youth in Action Programme.
D Results of the learning mobility programme Youth in Action in the Netherlands Framework
On 15 November 2006, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted the decision which established the Youth in Action Programme for the period 2007 to 2013. This document is the legal basis of the programme for its entire duration. Youth in Action is the EU Programme for young people aged 13 to 30: it aims to inspire a sense of active citizenship, solidarity and tolerance among young Europeans and to involve them in shaping the Union’s future. The programme runs in 33 European countries, of which 27 are EU member states. Youth in Action promotes mobility within and beyond EU borders, non-formal learning and intercultural dialogue, and encourages the inclusion of all young people, regardless of their educational, social and cultural background. It is designed to encourage young people, especially the most disadvantaged and the disabled, to participate in public life and to promote their sense of initiative, entrepreneurial spirit and creativity. With a total European budget of €885 million for seven years, the programme defnes general and specifc objectives that are implemented through so called “actions” (budget lines) (European Parliament 2006).
Young people participate in the programme through different budget lines, of which youth exchanges and the European Voluntary Service are the biggest. Through interaction with other young people and involvement in local communities, young people learn about each other, their values and beliefs. This contributes to the aims of the programme. After the activities there is the possibility to share the experience with others, but this is not one of the aims of the programme and, therefore, is mostly not seen as a priority.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Programme output
The Netherlands provides the Youth in Action Programme with an average budget for projects of €3.5 million a year. With a total Dutch budget from 2007 to 2011 of approximately €17 million, 780 projects have been executed with more than 16 000 participants, of whom 5 920 were Dutch. Applications come from a diverse group of organisations, as shown in Table 4, thereby reaching a diversity of young people. Table 4: Main aims of the organisations applying for projects Organised youth work
37%
Youth exchange
33%
Cultural activities
26%
Education and training
18%
Youth education
17%
Sharing the mobility experience: creating more effect
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
144
Coaching and support of young people
11%
Socio-political work
11%
Community-based work
9%
Open youth work
7%
Youth services
2%
Other
8%
Outcomes for young people In 2010 and 2011, the Netherlands took part in the RAY network, which has developed joint transnational research activities related to Youth in Action since 2008. In 2011, 15 countries took part in this network. The research was based on questionnaires, one for participants and one for project leaders of funded projects. In the Netherlands 264 participants and 89 project leaders flled in this questionnaire. Outcomes of the RAY research in the Netherlands show that most of the objectives of the Youth in Action Programme have been met, with 96% of the participants saying they would recommend participation in such a project to others. Young people report that they are stimulated to participate in society and to be European citizens. The participants feel more involved in other cultures and learn to share and co-operate with people from different cultures. Some of the participants are more active in political and/or community life. Besides this, knowledge and awareness about Europe and European issues is raised. It is clear that the participants are stimulated to be more active in society. Whether this leads to concrete behavioural changes, such as participation and active citizenship, cannot be determined on the basis of this research (Lekkerkerker 2011).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Table 5: Percentage of young people reporting a positive effect with Youth in Action Knowledge of European issues
49%
Affnity with European issues
62%
Personal skillsa
47%
Social skillsb
91%
a. more confdence and self-esteem b. working together in a team Source: Lekkerkerker 2011
Sharing the learning mobility experience Looking into the sharing of the learning mobility experience in the Youth in Action Programme, we see that the European Commission emphasises the promotion of the programme by publicising good examples and using the logo of the programme on publicity materials. The Commission has created the database EVE, where project results are recorded. Also, organisations and participants have the possibility to “disseminate and exploit their project results” (DEOR strategy). This varies from presentations on the outcomes of a project, events or discussion meetings
Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
17 145
to the distribution of a video or project photos. From our own experience in the Netherlands, we know that DEOR funds are usually used to create and distribute a video or photos. The “sharing part” in Youth in Action is usually not more than the promotion of the Youth in Action Programme and the activity in itself. Only rarely are experiences and competences learned shared with peers. This way, DEOR activities rarely contribute to the personal growth of participants and do not stimulate social and organisational skills. Also, the opportunity is lost to reach a large audience and to bring Europe closer to them. The fact that there is no extra money available for DEOR activities from 2011 onwards has diminished its importance and rendered the promotion and sharing less visible.
D Conclusion and recommendations Comparing outcomes When comparing both learning mobility programmes, the most striking difference from our perspective is the “sharing part” of the programmes. The focus on reaching a diverse group of young people, its aims of improving the knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of young people towards development co-operation (Xplore) and Europe (Youth in Action) seem roughly comparable. In the Xplore programme, sharing the learning mobility experience was an important and obligatory part of each project. In the Youth in Action Programme, “sharing” is focused more on the promotion and communication of the programme as a whole, and is one of the many priorities. Since it does not have a fxed “place” in the Youth in Action Programme, as a hard assessment criterion, and since the designated budget for it no longer exists, it is diffcult to steer this process and to put focus on the visibility of the sharing component. There are also applicants who do not see the extra value of sharing.
At the level of the young people involved, what effects does this difference lead to? In Table 6, we try to compare the outcomes on the knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of the participants.
Table 6: Percentage of young people reporting a positive effect with learning mobility
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Xplore
Youth in Action
Knowledge of development 80-82% co-operation
Knowledge of European issues
49%
Affnity with development co-operation
90%
Affnity with European issues
62%
Personal skills
78%
Personal skills
47%
Social skills
71%
Social skills
91%
Even though all the research was done through questionnaires flled in by the young people themselves, and thereby cannot be viewed as objective, Table 6 clearly shows a trend: the Xplore programme seems to have better effects on knowledge, attitudes and personal skills.
Sharing the mobility experience: creating more effect
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
146
On social skills, the Youth in Action Programme seems to have more effect. This could be explained by the fact that 85% of the respondents of the RAY research programme participated in group activities, such as youth exchanges and youth initiatives. Only 14% of the respondents participated in an individual programme, such as the European Voluntary Service. The focus of these projects is on social interaction and social learning. In the Xplore programme, more than 50% of the participants were involved in individual internships/volunteering work. These fndings support the trend from qualitative evaluations (NJi 2007) that the sharing part of a learning mobility programme deepens the learning effects on the participants. This makes sense, since sharing their experience makes young people more aware of their improved personal skills, and boosts self-esteem and self-confdence: Every time I talked about Kenya, I noticed that I learned so much in such a short time. I am continually sharing these experiences with the people around me. I feel much more involved in development co-operation. My parents and friends as well, because I talk about it all the time. I motivated many other students to participate in the project as well. Participant, learning mobility project Ex-change
Comparing costs The sharing component of a learning mobility programme is relatively “cheap”: for the Xplore programme, the costs for “sharing” were €200 per young person. As the average cost for the internship or volunteering work was €2 194, the sharing component made up only 9.1% of the total amount. The cost for the audience reached with the sharing activities is even lower: €12.19 per person. In comparison, the costs for a participant of the Youth in Action Programme were €1 598. Recommendations
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
There are different EU objectives aimed at young people in Europe. One of them is the renewed framework for European co-operation in the youth feld that is designed to provide better opportunities for Europe’s young people. There are two interrelated objectives for the period 2010 to 2018: the creation of more and equal opportunities in education and in the labour market and the promotion of active citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity. Besides this co-operation in the youth feld, there is the Europe 2020 growth strategy for the coming decade. In a changing world, the EU has to become a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy. This should provide high levels of employment, productivity and social cohesion. To support this, there is the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union establishing “Erasmus for All”, the Union Programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport (European Commission 2011).
Looking at these strategies at the European level, we recognise that employment and citizenship are important “targets” for young people. Therefore, (European) awareness, social and personal skills are of key importance. We believe that for building these competences in young people, sharing the learning mobility experience should be added to the concept of learning. When it comes to the continuity of the development of young people and learning mobility activities, there is a line that leads from the preparation phase through the learning mobility phase, the sharing phase, the evaluation phase and follow-up, which can result in planning new activities, and so on.
Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
17 147
Adding “sharing” to the concept of learning mobility serves different goals and target groups: • participants: sharing experiences by the participants contributes to the development of skills which can be used in their further personal or professional development. It creates awareness in the participants of European issues. It boosts their self-esteem and self-confdence, which will stimulate active citizenship; • applicant organisations: sharing experiences by participants contributes to the visibility of the organisation, the project at hand and the outcomes. Sharing experiences and demonstrating the competences learned by participants can justify the time and effort spent by organisations in setting up a learning mobility programme; • audience of the “sharing activities”: in theory, if there is good content to share and there is a willingness to share the outcomes, products and experiences on the part of the participants, there is a large audience that can be reached.
Willingness to share
Figure 1: Sharing model
ou ey
h ac
re
pl
o Pe
Quality of content
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
In practice, it is important to fnd the right audience. From what we have seen in our learning mobility programmes, it works well for young people to share knowledge, values, beliefs and practices with peers. Peer education works well because it is a dialogue between equals. It involves members of a particular group educating others of the same (age or social) group. A good example disseminated that motivates participants can therefore contribute to awareness on European issues, create motivation and enthusiasm for a learning mobility experience and promote organisations active in this feld.
We would, therefore, recommend the inclusion of a component of “sharing the mobility experience” through peer learning in mobility programmes. As we have argued, it is a cost-effective means of strengthening the outcome of these programmes. It will stimulate young people to share their experience as a natural part of a mobility project, which will contribute not only to them personally, but also to their organisations, their audience and – in broader terms – to society.
D References European Commission (2011), “Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing ‘ERASMUS FOR ALL’, The Union Programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport”, COM (2011) 788 fnal, European Commission, Brussels, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM: 2011:0788:FIN:EN:PDF, accessed 15 August 2012.
Sharing the mobility experience: creating more effect
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
148
European Parliament (2006), Decision No. 1719/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing the “Youth in Action” programme for the period 2007 to 2013, Offcial Journal of the European Union, available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:327: 0030:0044:EN:PDF, accessed 15 August 2012. IOB (2008), IOB Evaluaties no 313, Xplore-programma, OBT, The Hague.
Lekkerkerker L. and Knippenbergh A., De impact van “Youth in Action”. Rapportage over het onderzoek naar de impact van deelname aan het Youth in Action-programma, NJi, Utrecht. Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2003), Policy paper “Aan elkaar verplicht, Ontwikkelingssamenwerking op weg naar 2015”, Kamerstuk TK: 2003-2004, 29 234, No. 1. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Hague. NJi (2007), Jaarverslag Xplore 2006, NJi, Utrecht.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
NJi (2009), The World Xplored: De resultaten van vijf jaar Xplore, NJi, Utrecht.
Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Steve Hillman
Opening talent in young people: the role of nonformal learning in the UK Foyer Network D Introduction
F
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
oyers are providers of accommodation, learning, employment and personal development support for young people unable to live in the family home or take other traditional routes to independent adult life. Since their inception in the UK in 1992, they have prepared young people for independent and thriving adulthood by offering a holistic package of services, addressing all the needs and aspirations with which individual young people present. Non-formal learning is at the heart of Foyers’ attempt to enable young people to develop into independent and thriving adults. Foyer programmes help to prepare young people to re-engage with mainstream learning and work, and they can also be used to develop the essential life skills – for example cooking, budgeting, and working with others – that are the key building blocks for maintaining a thriving adult life. They are available to all young people resident in Foyer accommodation, but also to other young people experiencing similar diffculties. Some non-formal learning programmes address the issue of learning mobility directly by providing opportunities for
8
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
150
international travel and exchange with other EU nations, and occasionally even further afeld. This chapter will examine the scope and range of the non-formal learning programmes in the UK Foyer Network, touch briefy on the role of digital learning and social media, and examine the barriers that learners sometimes face and how incentives can be used to overcome these barriers. It will then discuss the experience of the UK Foyer Network in providing learning mobility programmes, and address some of the diffculties they have faced. It will also provide brief reference to the relationship between Foyers’ non-formal learning programmes and emerging policy agendas in the UK, and relate these programmes to the European Union’s Key Competences for Lifelong Learning. Finally, the chapter will conclude with the lessons that the Foyer Federation has learned from 20 years of designing, developing and delivering non-formal learning programmes for young people in the UK.
D Background to learning in Foyers Foyers’ offer of holistic support means that non-formal learning can be tailored in a way that meets individual needs and aspirations. Its methodology offers opportunities for a blend of individual and group tuition, information, advice and guidance and online learning. The “contract”, signed by the young person and a Foyer that promises commitment to engage in return for high-quality personalised services, offers the opportunity for refection and recognition of the distance travelled by the young person on their non-formal learning journey.
Over the years, Foyers have funded their non-formal learning programmes in a variety of different ways, through national programme funding, European funding (usually the European Social Fund), funding from charitable trusts, or local sources of funding such as Community Chests. European programmes such as Leonardo have provided opportunities for young people and staff in Foyers to travel internationally. The content of programmes varies widely according to the size of the Foyer, the needs and aspirations of the young people it serves, and the resources available. The next section presents a broad view of the content, scope and range of Foyer provision, taken from the Foyer Federation’s research and assessment work over recent years.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Content, scope and range of provision in UK Foyer Network Activities can be catalogued as falling into four categories to do with Employment and Skills, Physical and Mental Health, and Lifeskills and Creativity. Among the most frequent are sessions on cookery, healthy eating and nutrition, employment and job search, fnancial capability (budgeting, debt management, etc.), and sport and physical health. The table below presents a fuller list of activities, in order of frequency under each theme:
Steve Hillman
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
18 151
Table 1: List of Foyer activities Employment and Skills
Physical and Mental Health
Communication Literacy and numeracy Job search, CV writing, interview skills Financial capability, budgeting IT Coaching and peer mentoring Enterprise Hair and beauty Construction
Cookery, healthy eating, nutrition Sports and physical activities Self-esteem, assertiveness Well-being, enabling change Anger management Domestic abuse, bullying awareness Sexuality Food hygiene Cycling and cycle maintenance
Lifeskills
Creativity
Sexual health Drugs and alcohol awareness Maintaining a tenancy Move-on/resettlement Citizenship Induction DIY and gardening Health and safety, frst aid, fre safety, road safety
Arts and crafts, photography Media and flm production Music and DJ-ing Dance and drama Discussion groups Book groups Residents’ newsletter
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The content of non-formal learning programmes in Foyers strikes a balance between activities designed to engage residents, those that are designed to teach useful skills and those that promote re-entry into learning and work. Clearly, it is possible to achieve all three within one activity, and perhaps the same activity will have different outcomes for different participants. A cookery session could, for example, be offering one resident the opportunity to learn about healthy eating, another the opportunity for some numeracy work, a third the opportunity to develop team working skills, and a fourth the chance to develop their leadership potential. It is in this ability to achieve several objectives in the same activity where the real value of non-formal learning lies, and why it is so important to provide individual space for refection around these activities, so that the value of the learning for each individual can be made apparent. Opportunities for Foyer residents themselves to have an input into the way their non-formal learning programmes are delivered are offered in a variety of ways. The most popular is to involve residents as tutors, facilitators, fundraisers and mentors on the programmes themselves. There are other procedural ways of obtaining residents’ feedback and ideas as to how to shape their non-formal learning offer, including through consultation with the resident representative, through resident/ house meetings and focus groups, and through questionnaires and evaluation forms. Another mechanism is through one-on-one support planning, keyworking and coaching sessions.
D Space for refection The support planning process has an important role to play in offering time and space to refect on the impact of an individual’s learning journey. Residents are coached by their keyworker to refect on what they have learned, both in practical terms (I can cook, I can clean, etc.) but also in terms of their own personal development (I know I can work in a team, I know I can ask for help when I need
Opening talent in young people: the role of non-formal learning in the UK Foyer Network
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
152
it, etc). Support planning sessions highlight the importance of the keyworker as a coach, mentor or trusted adult who can support the resident in identifying the key elements of their learning journey. .
Around half of Foyers use specifc tools to “capture” the impact of informal learning, and of these tools the most frequently used was the Outcomes Star. Again, around half of Foyers include an exit assessment that provides an opportunity for the resident to refect on the journey they have made.
D Use of social media and online learning platforms Foyers have been engaged with the online learning agenda from the very early days, at the start of the previous decade. Many have been providing online learning services through the government-sponsored initiative learndirect through most of the last decade. In recent years, Foyers are increasingly using social media to engage young people, communicate with them regularly, and indeed track the progress of their learning journeys. An initiative from the Foyer Federation called MyNav (The Foyer Federation 2009) provides an online learning platform with social media integration for Foyers whose access to social media can sometimes be restricted through the Information and Communications Technology policies of the housing associations that own and manage them.
Social media such as Twitter and Facebook clearly have a role to play in facilitating learning mobility programmes. Facebook groups are used in joining people from different organisations in different nations together to plan and prepare and help to foster a sense of intimacy and connection in the run-up to a programme. And Twitter hashtags relating to particular events bring people together in an online space that helps keep them connected after the event.
D Barriers and incentives for learners The diffculties faced by individual learners in engaging with non-formal learning are as follows, in order of frequency:
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
• poor experience of mainstream school; • low self-esteem, fear of feeling a “failure”; • chaotic lifestyle; • peer pressure to disengage; • substance misuse; • undiagnosed learning diffculties.
It is signifcant that many of these barriers relate directly to the impacts that nonformal learning programmes are trying to have on the lives of young people. Many of the activities that form part of Foyers’ non-formal learning programmes are low-cost interventions. But they do require staff to be on hand to co-ordinate, supervise and lead activities. A key organisational barrier for Foyers is that it can be diffcult to recruit staff that are able to work at evenings and weekends, when demand for non-formal learning activities is at its highest.
One important incentive frequently cited by Foyers is that the outcomes attained by participating and achieving in a non-formal learning programme are an important part of “moving through” the Foyer process. Young people who participate in nonformal learning are noticeably more likely to progress quickly into independent
Steve Hillman
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
18 153
accommodation, which is the primary goal of most Foyer residents. Some Foyers have a formal process for this – for example, a points scale operates in the Foyer for the allocation of move-on accommodation, and for some it is simply an informal outcome of the process.
D Outcomes and impact for learners Foyers’ non-formal learning programmes offer a wide range of outcomes that can be grouped under three themes: knowledge and skills; behaviour; and identity. Under knowledge and skills are the outcomes that relate specifcally to developing expertise in a given area, whether that area is to do with employment, learning, personal development or “lifeskills”. The behavioural theme relates to specifc changes that happen as a result of non-formal learning, such as reduced substance misuse or less risky sexual behaviour. Grouped under the third theme, identity, are outcomes often described as “soft”, to do with increased self-confdence, self-esteem and feelings of well-being, but also those to do with a sense of ownership over one’s living environment, or an increased ability to set and meet challenging personal goals. Another important outcome is that through non-formal learning programmes young people whose lives are highly chaotic can have structure, stability and routine introduced into their lives. This is a key step towards re-engagement with the mainstream.
Table 2 details, in order of frequency, the outcomes relating to non-formal learning stated by Foyers. Table 2: Outcomes of non-formal learning, Foyers Knowledge and Skills
Behaviour
Identity
Increased employability
Increased stability/ structure/routine
Higher self-confdence
Enhanced ability to sustain healthy relationships
Increased personal wellbeing
Ability to work in a team, listen, negotiate
Reduced substance misuse
Greater independence
Less risky sexual behaviour
Increased ability to stay safe*
Better ability to make a positive contribution*
Increased ability to be healthy*
Increased economic wellbeing*
Enhanced social skills
Progression into learning and work
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Increased IT skills
Understanding equality and diversity
Higher self-esteem
Sense of achievement* Willingness to stretch/ challenge oneself Better ability to “navigate” options More “enquiring mind” Sense of ownership over living space
*(Department for Children, Schools and Families 2004)
The longer-term impact of non-formal learning programmes for Foyer residents are grouped around two themes: frstly, that non-formal learning promotes entry into formal learning and work; and secondly, that non-formal learning promotes the development of social skills, involvement and a sense of purpose. Non-formal
Opening talent in young people: the role of non-formal learning in the UK Foyer Network
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
154
learning plays a crucial role in combating the feelings of isolation, low emotional well-being, and low self-confdence that are key barriers to making the transition to independent adulthood. A further key impact is the fact that non-formal learning programmes reduce the number of repeat tenancies by ensuring that learners have gained the skills and resources that they need to live independently in the community. The “transferability” of the skills learned through non-formal learning – that non-formal learning promotes the development of skills that learners can use in their everyday lives – is of key importance.
D Experience of UK Foyer Network in providing learning mobility programmes As mentioned above, initiatives under the European Lifelong Learning Programme such as Leonardo have provided opportunities for young people and the staff who support them to travel within the EU on exchange programmes in order to enhance the non-formal learning programmes that they deliver. To date, staff and young people from Foyers have held exchange visits with like projects in Spain, Italy, France, the Netherlands, Germany and Romania. It is unquestionably the case that these programmes help to accelerate young people’s progress towards developing the skills necessary for independent adult life. They provide an opportunity to validate and reinforce skills developed through Foyer programmes, particularly around communication, resilience and self-esteem. There are, however, logistical challenges that need to be overcome. Firstly, the cost of obtaining a passport can be prohibitively expensive for young people in Foyers. Secondly, young people who participate in learning mobility programmes who are in receipt of welfare benefts can face the prospect of having their benefts stopped for the period that they are overseas, which can present major diffculties for young people in Foyers in terms of rent arrears. Foyers have overcome these barriers by encouraging young people to fundraise themselves for the cost of their passport, and by liaising with beneft agencies around the eligibility of learning mobility programmes as a “volunteering” activity, though there are again diffculties with this such as the requirement to be available to attend a job interview within 48 hours (DWP 2010).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Where learning mobility programmes have been most successful, they have tended to have the following qualities: • they focus on a specifc, discrete activity during the programme, such as building and ftting a classroom, that can be completed during the programme and celebrated as an achievement; • there is an explicit focus on the skills that will be developed through the programme, and individual progress is regularly monitored; • there is continuity with activities in the home country, whether this is in the form of entry to a related mainstream learning programme, or continued contact with the organisations and people “hosting” the learning mobility programme.
D ÒFitÓ with emerging policy agendas in the UK Recent discussion around public service reform in the UK focuses on the concept of “personalisation”: the tailoring of public services around the unique and specifc needs of the individual. Reforms in some areas of social policy such as adult social care and disability have made signifcant progress in this area (Cabinet Offce 2012).
Steve Hillman
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
18 155
The non-formal learning programmes that Foyers operate have direct relevance to this agenda as the programmes they operate have the fexibility and range to meet individual needs and, crucially, aspirations. The recently launched Framework of Outcomes for Young People (McNeil et al. 2012), endorsed by the Department for Education, provides a model for commissioners and providers to articulate the outcomes that they are working towards when commissioning or providing services for young people. Most of the outcomes stated on the Framework are directly relevant to the work that Foyers do, and Foyers are beginning to articulate their services in these terms, where historically they have used a policy framework known as Every Child Matters to do this (see Table 2 above).
D The European key competences for lifelong learning There is a reasonably good ft between the programmes offered by Foyers and the Key Competences for Lifelong Learning (European Union 2006). In particular, in respect of the competences around communication in the mother tongue, mathematical competence, digital competence, learning to learn, and social and civic competence, there is a recognisable alignment between the defnitions, knowledge, skills and attitudes outlined in the competences and the scope and range of nonformal learning programmes in Foyers. There is a less good ft between the competences in communication in other languages, sense of initiative and entrepreneurship, and cultural awareness and expression. This is not to say that these are not addressed at all, but that the knowledge, skills and attitudes outlined in these competences are more isolated and “piecemeal” than the others. A number of Foyers, for example, do have cultural awareness or enterprise programmes in operation, but these are frequently reliant upon the interests of a particular resident or member of staff, and are less “systematic” than the others.
D Conclusion: lessons learned
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Non-formal learning has a hugely important role to play in Foyers. It can be a vital means of developing those skills and resources necessary for independent adulthood. Alongside more practical things like learning to cook, clean and live on a budget, non-formal learning can be an important means of developing skills like forward planning, resilience, and teamworking that are an essential part of being an adult.
The discussion above gives a favour of the range of non-formal learning activities taking place in Foyers, and of the benefts they have brought to young people. The key lessons that can be drawn from these examples are as follows: • non-formal learning should begin with where the young person is, in terms of both venue and mindset. Learning that is led by the young person is much more likely to meet their needs and lead to successful progression; • non-formal learning is much more powerful when combined with a space or a process for the learner to refect on its impact. There are a wide range of means for doing this, including coaching sessions, journals, portfolio building and online resources; • the range of non-formal learning opportunities should be as broad and as fexible as possible. In general terms, the less it feels like school, the better; • the views, attitudes and motivations of the learner should be respected at all times.
Opening talent in young people: the role of non-formal learning in the UK Foyer Network
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
156
This includes allowing people to disengage from time to time; • training staff in the principles of coaching and in the theory of learning and development is benefcial. It can help staff supporting young people to refect on their non-formal learning journeys and set new goals for the future; • initiatives to support learning mobility and international travel can be greatly benefcial but barriers such as access to passports and potential loss of welfare benefts need to be overcome frst.
D References Cabinet Offce (2012), Open Public Services 2012, Cabinet Offce, London, available at http://fles.openpublicservices.cabinetoffce.gov.uk/HMG_OpenPublicServices_ web.pdf, accessed 26 August 2012.
Department for Children, Schools and Families (now Department for Education) (2004), Every Child Matters: Change for children, DCSF, London, available at www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/ DfES/1081/2004, accessed 23 August 2012.
Department for Work and Pensions (2010), Volunteering while getting benefts, DWP, London, available at www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dwp1023.pdf, accessed 23 August 2012. European Union (2006), Key Competences for Lifelong Learning, European Union, Luxembourg, available at http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/ ll-learning/keycomp_en.pdf, accessed 22 August 2012.
McNeil B., Reeder N. and Rich J. (2012), A framework of outcomes for young people, Young Foundation, London, available at www.youngfoundation.org/publications/ reports/framework-outcomes-young-people, accessed 26 August 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The Foyer Federation (2009), MyNav: destination independence, The Foyer Federation, London.
Steve Hillman
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Bettina Wissing
Facilitating learning mobility for all: the JiVE experience D Introduction Impacts of international youth work and young people with fewer opportunities
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
P
ositive and long-term effects of participation in international youth work on the personality development of young people, known for a long time to youth workers and stakeholders in the feld, have been confrmed by diverse studies within the last years (IJAB et al. 2012). International youth work contributes effectively to gaining intercultural skills. These skills become more and more important, not only in professional everyday life, but also for living in a culturally diverse German society. International youth work facilitates intercultural learning in authentic settings and under favourable learning conditions. In these settings, young people’s competences and resources are activated.
9
On the other hand, these experiences have turned out not to reach all young people in the same way. Young people with fewer opportunities participate much less in international mobility programmes (Thimmel et al. 2011). In
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
158
Germany, this concerns in particular many of those young people who do not attend the Gymnasium. 27 A considerable proportion of young people with fewer opportunities in Germany are young people with a migration background.28 Young people from migrant backgrounds are often faced with worse school results and greater diffculties in the transition from school to training (Beicht et al. 2010; Hamburgisches Weltwirtschaftsinstitut 2007). That is why, in Germany, young migrants are often taken into consideration when supporting measures for young people with fewer opportunities are set up.
The pilot project JiVE The pilot project JiVE Jugendarbeit international – Vielfalt erleben (Youth Work International – Experiencing Diversity), was run from 2008 to 2010 by IJAB International Youth Service of the Federal Republic of Germany and JUGEND für Europa, the German Agency for the EU’s Youth in Action Programme.29 JiVE aimed to strengthen the participation of young people from the immigrant community in international youth work and proft from international youth work as a means for a greater intercultural awareness in the feld of child and youth services. The approach of the pilot project was to allow structural networking of international youth work with youth social work (especially youth migration services) and immigrant community groups. Sub-projects have been realised in three different international youth work formats: youth exchanges, European voluntary programmes and expert programmes.
The pilot project provided scientifc evidence of the fact that young people’s participation in international youth work measures (such as international youth exchanges and voluntary services) has positive and sustainable effects on their personal development (Thimmel et al. 2011).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Experts can beneft from international programmes as well: the exchange of expertise with their colleagues from other countries extends their professional and personal horizons, raises their awareness of multicultural issues, and provides them with intercultural skills that increase the quality of their work in child and youth services (Thimmel et al. 2011).
27. The German school system has different coexisting types of secondary schools: Hauptschule, Realschule, Gymnasium and a comprehensive Gesamtschule, as well as special education schools. The decision for school type is taken according to the pupils’ competencies, such as academic achievement, potential and the ability to work independently at the age of 10. In general terms, Hauptschule and Realschule lead to vocational training, Gymnasium to university studies. A school-leaving certifcate from the Hauptschule is often regarded as a defect when young people are applying for vocational training programmes.
28. The German Federal Statistical Offce defnes a person as having a migrant background in those cases where “at least one parent has foreign citizenship, is a naturalised German citizen or an ethnic German repatriate, regardless of whether they immigrated to or were born in Germany.” (Deutsches Statistisches Bundesamt 2012) 29. See the brochure IJAB-Fachstelle für Internationale Jugendarbeit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. and JUGEND für Europa. Deutsche Agentur für das EU-Programm JUGEND IN AKTION (n.d.).
Bettina Wissing
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
19 159
D The youth policy initiative JiVE (2011-14) As the scientifc research programme accompanying the pilot project JiVE (2008-10) has shown, the concepts and methods of international youth work are particularly effective in promoting integration and participation for all young people, whether they are from the immigrant community or not (Thimmel et al. 2011).
During the next phase of the JiVE initiative (2011-14), these insights are translated into practice in the context of child and youth services, particularly at the local level. Special support is given to creating partnerships between agencies and organisations responsible for child and youth services so they can reach out to a larger number of young people with fewer opportunities and young people from the immigrant community and involve them in non-formal learning processes in the course of international youth work measures. JiVE seeks to strengthen structural links between international youth work and immigration-centred youth work (e.g. youth migration services) as well as immigrant community organisations that work with children and young people. The overarching goal of the youth policy initiative is to help young people with fewer opportunities, regardless of their background, to enjoy the same opportunities in life as everyone else. In addition, JiVE aims to:
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
• involve more disadvantaged young people and young people from the immigrant community in international youth work activities; • establish sustainable structural relationships between international youth work and youth social work institutions, youth migration services, immigrant community groups, young immigrants’ organisations, youth services run by the local authorities, schools and others; • provide training for experts working in youth services run by the local authorities, youth social workers, representatives of immigrant community groups and young immigrants’ organisations, and experts working in youth migration services, thus raising their awareness of and qualifcation for international youth work on the one hand and qualifying them for work with young people with fewer opportunities from various backgrounds on the other; • increasingly promote learning mobility initiatives in the shape of international short- and long-term projects which take place abroad and initiate educational and learning processes; • raise the profle of international youth work as a non-formal form of education.
With this profle, the JiVE initiative makes a vital contribution towards implementing the EU Youth Strategy in Germany by encouraging social integration, facilitating the transition into employment, promoting participation in society, and validating and recognising informal and non-formal learning achievements. It becomes clear that international youth work needs to be treated as a crosssectional topic for youth work. It should not only be set up “on top” whenever there is some free space for an extra activity, but it should be an integral aspect of all activities concerning youth. This implies that all persons working with young people have to be involved. Therefore, creating new partnerships and networking are crucial elements of the initiative.
JiVE is put into practice in the form of a network initiative and implemented by numerous organisations of various backgrounds. Youth social work organisations participate as well as migrant organisations, classically organised youth
Facilitating learning mobility for all: the JiVE experience
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
160
organisations and international youth work experts. JiVE is implemented nationwide on various governance levels with a particular focus on the local level. The six subinitiatives are:30 • Kommune31 goes International (IJAB in co-operation with the Association of Local Authorities); • International.Interkulturell (Deutscher Bundesjugendring – German Federal Youth Council); • Interkulturell goes on! (transfer e.V.); • Jugendsozialarbeit macht mobil (Kooperationsverbund Jugendsozialarbeit – Co-operative Federation for Youth Social Work); • Diversity-oriented international youth work (JUGEND für Europa); • Pilot project “Facilitating learning experiences for young people through transnational mobility” (JUGEND für Europa in co-operation with IJAB). This pilot project began in July 2012 as a sixth sub-initiative of JiVE.32
These sub-initiatives are connected by shared public relations, annual expert conferences for representatives from all sub-initiatives, and a joint steering group. JiVE receives funding from the German Federal Ministry of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth and from the EU Youth in Action Programme.
D Networking and new partnerships Ð supporting international youth work at local level Kommune goes International
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Twenty-one local authorities applied in 2011 to join the sub-initiative Kommune goes International. In doing so, they committed themselves to work together with statutory as well as voluntary organisations at local level in order to further international youth work and to make it available to all young people, with a special focus on young people with fewer opportunities and young people from the immigrants’ community. In each participating town or district, networks have been set up with representatives of very different types of organisations working with young people, for example from the youth offce, youth organisations, youth centres, youth social work, youth migration services, schools, commissioners for integration, vocational assistance facilities, and local non-governmental organisations. During the frst months of the initiative, the members of the respective networks elaborated a “Local Development Plan” for international youth work. Starting with a review of the current situation of international youth work in this local area and an analysis of needs, the networks have set aims and objectives for the years up to 2014. They have thus worked out what they intend to achieve until the end of the initiative, in order to strengthen international youth work on the local level, allow all young people to participate, establish permanent networks on the local but also on the regional, national or international level, and raise the recognition of the potentials of international non-formal 30. For more information on the JiVE initiative as well as the sub-initiatives mentioned, see www.jiveinternational.de, accessed 3 February 2013. 31. Kommune in German stands for “local authority”, the administrative level responsible for youth services in Germany, but can also mean “city” or “town”.
32. The German Sports Youth and the Federal Forum for Child and Youth Travel also intend to join the JiVE initiative with two more sub-initiatives.
Bettina Wissing
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
19 161
learning formats. In their Local Development Plan the networks fnally describe who commits (and in co-operation with which other member of the network) to what measure(s) to achieve the set aims and objectives and ensure sustainability of the newly set up provisions. In this context, new partnerships between stakeholders that have so far not worked together are of high importance. For the whole duration of the initiative, local networks are supported by a counselling team of experts, managed by IJAB. Additionally, IJAB offers trainings and network meetings on diverse topics regarding international youth work (e.g. fnancing, introduction to international youth work methods and organisation, expert exchange programmes, public relations). These are important moments for the exchange of experience among the participants. The towns and districts that have joined Kommune goes International are very heterogeneous as regards their size, their experience in international youth work and their local basic conditions (e.g. personnel, fnancial provisions, political support, already existing co-operation networks). In spite or even because of this, the exchange of experience is very rich and helpful. Kommune goes International is scientifcally evaluated during implementation and also until a year thereafter. This research aims to come up with general recommendations for action to strengthen international youth work. It will describe both benefcial and inhibiting elements for a sustainable structural anchoring of international youth work on the local level and make its fndings available to all towns and districts in Germany. Benefts to this day
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The progress of the initiative has so far revealed that the exchange of experience facilitated by the different network meetings during the initiative is a great asset, and participants strongly beneft from it. From among the group of participating towns and communities, some participants have established smaller work groups to address specifc topics (e.g. how to integrate international youth work in the municipal planning of youth provisions). Discussions centre on questions such as: How can youth exchanges, work camps or voluntary services be designed to appeal to young people with fewer opportunities? What does this mean for the pedagogical setting (methods, number of accompanying staff, fnancial questions)? How can we set up close contacts with these young people? What experiences have resulted with different types of fnancing? For local authorities, the fact of being part of a nationwide initiative represents additional backing for their activities in the feld and especially for political support. The supporting activities for the participating towns and districts are accompanied by activities at Land level. IJAB is about to co-operate with all Länder33 ministries responsible for youth and with youth councils at Land level, in order to back up local activities with information and training provisions at Land level. As for international co-operation, most towns and districts maintain partnerships with organisations in European countries. Financial support comes mainly from the EU Youth in Action Programme and the bilateral organisations for youth exchange existing in Germany. Each Local Development Plan is part of a diversity of approaches and activities planned by stakeholders in local networks. Several towns plan to install a local competence 33. With all 16 federal states who do have their own youth offce on the Land level.
Facilitating learning mobility for all: the JiVE experience
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
162
centre for international youth work, offering information and counselling for young people as well as youth work experts. Some others have applied to become a local Eurodesk partner to guarantee the provision of information on opportunities for young people to go abroad. More examples of local initiatives include: • linking the Kommune goes International initiative with several other youth policy approaches, leading to an internationalisation of youth work as a whole; • setting up co-operation between a Hauptschule (school),34 a youth centre, a vocational assistance facility and the municipal youth offce. In the course of this co-operation, a group of young students with fewer opportunities will spend their practical placement in France, preparing for this stay through school teaching, workshops in the youth centre and assistance from the vocational assistance mentor for one year; • furthering the participation of young people with fewer opportunities in European voluntary services. The local network seeks to help these young people make decisions for a voluntary service. It will address young people who have already participated in a youth exchange (and have, thereby, already ventured abroad) and encourage them to undertake a short-term service. This might then give them the necessary confdence to accept a longer stay abroad; • in one of the participating towns, young people targeted with the initiative have been included in the process right from the beginning, that is also in the elaboration of the Local Development Plan.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
These are only a handful of examples from the wide range of activities planned in the frame of the initiative Kommune goes International. The evaluation of the activities has to take place before drawing a fnal conclusion from the outcomes. But even by the summer of 2012 one could already make out various tracks indicating outputs of the initiative: • the importance of partnerships and networks (bringing together experts from the different felds concerned, reducing the time and effort for each partner to be spent on international activities, benefting from knowledge exchange); • the signifcance of political support at the local level (international activities are more easily carried out if youth work experts have full political backing at the local level. The results of recent research on the effects of international youth work are helpful in this respect, as well as the impetus from Land and federal ministries as well as the Association of Local Authorities); • the provision of personnel and infrastructure by the local authority is a central precondition (this is in turn easier to realise if international youth work is acknowledged to be an integral part of youth work provisions); • eventually, it is crucial to have youth work experts who are motivated for international activities (creating intrinsic motivation by organising expert exchange programmes).
The IKUS-Project Ð co-operation of formal and non-formal learning As mentioned above, co-operation has proved benefcial in strengthening international youth work and making it available to all young people. A good example of successful co-operation the participating municipalities can build on is the IKUS-Project (Interkulturelles Lernfeld Schule – School as an Intercultural Learning Field), run by IJAB from August 2009 to January 2012. With this project, non-formal learning approaches for the acquisition of intercultural skills have been transferred into a formal learning setting, and have, thereby, led to innovative impetus for a holistic education and personality development. 34. See footnote 27.
Bettina Wissing
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
19 163
The IKUS-Project aimed at: • sensitising participants towards and extending intercultural skills at schools; • developing co-operation between the feld of international youth work and school; • integrating young people with a migration background; • motivating students for a voluntary commitment in international youth work; • developing and testing feld modules; • documenting and publishing experiences, modules and scientifc evaluation.
Fourteen secondary schools from all different school types from the administrative region of Cologne as well as international youth work organisations were involved in the IKUS project. In each school, 8-10 modules were developed for the deepening of intercultural skills. The modules considered the specifc situation and education focus of the respective schools as well as the students’ needs, capacities and experiences. The modules either became part of the curriculum or were applied in a different form (e.g. projects). The development and implementation of the modules were carried out jointly by a teacher and an international youth work professional, working in tandem. Benefts to this day
Overall 100 modules have been developed, tested and documented.35 They comprised for example intercultural workshops or trainings in the context of international exchanges, participation in group voluntary services and stays in host families, projects on interreligious dialogue, or intercultural city tours illustrating migration as an integral part of German history. The different linguistic skills of the students with a migration background were also important and have been found to be a resource for the lessons. The participants benefted in a very concrete way from the project. The young people developed intercultural skills, made contact with out-of-school youth work and developed possibilities for voluntary commitment. The international youth work professionals got access to so far unreached target groups and acquired a better recognition of non-formal learning in general. Teachers benefted from the methods and contents of youth work and thereby gained new impetus and ideas for their own teaching.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Conclusion German experts identify a paradigm shift in the perception of international youth work. Mobility programmes as non-formal learning setting have to become a cross-sectional task of youth work. The effects and potentials of international youth work, proved by recent research studies, underline the necessity to lift up international youth work from its marginal position and to place it in the mainstream of youth work. The approaches and new co-operations developed so far in the context of the local networks of the Kommune goes International initiative as well as the other JiVE sub-initiatives are promising.
35. The documentation of the project can be found here: www.ijab.de/uploads/tx_ttproducts/datasheet/ IKUS_Handbuch_WEB.pdf and www.ijab.de/fleadmin/user_upload/documents/PDFs/IKUS-Werkstatt/ IKUS-CD_IMPULSE.pdf, accessed 3 February 2013.
Facilitating learning mobility for all: the JiVE experience
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
164
Still, some hurdles need to be cleared to achieve the aims of the initiative, for example to adjust funding rules to meet the requirements of the target group of young people with fewer opportunities and improve co-operation between formal and non-formal education. Furthermore, the basic conditions in the concerned policy felds need to be improved, in order to allow new forms of co-operation among all felds concerning youth.
D References Beicht U. and Grato M. (2010), Ausbildungsplatzsuche: Geringere Chancen für junge Frauen und Männer mit Migrationshintergrund, BIPP Report 4 (15), available at: www.bibb.de/de/56246.htm, accessed 21 August 2012. Deutsches Statistisches Bundesamt (2012), available at https://www.destatis.de/ EN/Publications/STATmagazin/Population/2012_03/Explanations.html#Link1, accessed 21 August 2012.
Hamburgisches Weltwirtschaftsinstitut (ed.) (2007), focus MIGRATION: Deutschland, Nr. 1, available at: http://focus-migration.hwwi.de/index.php?id=1509&L=0, accessed 21 August 2012. IJAB – Fachstelle für Internationale Jugendarbeit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. and Forscher-Praktiker-Dialog Internationale Jugendarbeit (ed.) (2006), Internationale Jugendarbeit wirkt. Forschungsergebnisse im Überblick, self-published, Bonn/ Köln. IJAB – Fachstelle für Internationale Jugendarbeit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. and JUGEND für Europa. Deutsche Agentur für das EU-Programm JUGEND IN AKTION (n.d.), International youth work: Participation. Diversity. Intercultural awareness, available at www.jive-international.de/p1583460103_500.html, accessed 21 August 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Thimmel A., Chehata Y. and Katrin R. (2011), Interkulturelle Öffnung der Internationalen Jugendarbeit. Gesamtbericht der wissenschaftlichen Begleitung zum Modellprojekt JiVE “Jugendarbeit international – Vielfalt erleben”, available at www.jugendfuereuropa.de/downloads/4-20-2881/Gesamtbericht%20JiVe%20 Chehata_Ri%C3%9F_Thimmel.pdf, accessed 21 August 2012.
Bettina Wissing
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Elisa Briga
EFILÕs European Citizenship Trimester Programme: from global to European Active Citizenship
T
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
his chapter aims to explore the experience of an international youth organisation with a global perspective which engages in the active promotion of the European principles, creating from its core activity, pupil exchanges, an innovative European Citizenship programme: the European Citizenship Trimester Programme (ECTP). ECTP is a trimester exchange, host family and school-based, providing an immersion in another European culture and directly tackling European Citizenship content both during the exchange and at the session in Brussels at the end of the three months, where all participants of the programme meet to share their intercultural experience and learn about being active citizens of Europe.
D Background: AFS global/ EFIL European The European youth work sector is characterised by a number of international youth organisations which originated as global entities before acquiring a strong European identity and before youth policy became an interest of the Council of Europe and later of the European Union. AFS belongs to this category: it was born in 1914 as the American Field Service when young
0
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
166
Americans living in Paris volunteered as ambulance drivers at the American Hospital of Paris, and in 1946, after the two world wars, it became a permanent international organisation promoting pupil exchanges between the United States and the rest of the world. Only in 1971 was a federation of AFS organisations in Europe established – the European Federation for Intercultural Learning (EFIL), which viewed its founding thus: The birth of EFIL can be seen as the result of the crisis of old naïve idealism, of the loss of image of the USA, of the hope for a united Europe, and of a new trend towards internationalisation (EFIL 2011).
Although the creation of EFIL might suggest a global/European dichotomy, the immediate result was to open the AFS network to multilateral exchanges and globalisation, breaking the idea of unilateral exchanges with the United States. AFS organisations, in 1971, were initiators of change, led by active citizens who wanted the AFS mission to come closer to reality by providing intercultural learning opportunities with a wider range to help people develop the knowledge, skills and understanding needed to create a more just and peaceful world (AFS 2012a). EFIL’s objectives are intertwined with AFS’s mission because its role is to support its members to “strengthen their programmes, quality and reputation, in particular in the European context” (EFIL 2012).
As Europe – through EFIL – is a space for innovation within AFS, Europe – through the work of the Council of Europe and the European Union – aims at being an area within which to experiment with “global citizenship” in a multicultural society, based on human rights, democracy and intercultural learning. This notion of “Active Citizenship” is called European Citizenship (Partnership Council of Europe and European Commission Training-Youth 2003).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
EFIL strongly relates to the concept and values of European Citizenship and since its foundation it has been co-operating with the Council of Europe and the European Union, providing its expertise in intercultural learning for the building of a European identity. In particular, in 1998-99 EFIL managed in the framework of the Council of Europe, the pilot project European Secondary School Student Exchanges (ESSSE), funded by the Norwegian Government. The programme consisted of a three-month individual school exchange from/to 10 countries in Europe to encourage East-West communication and integration (EFIL 1999). The programme was “successful but funding for continuation could unfortunately not be secured” (Department Education, Culture and Heritage, Youth and Sport of the Council of Europe 2004).
Although ESSSE was discontinued, EFIL continued promoting pupil exchanges to the European institutions and in 2006 it won the tender for the preparation of the European Commission’s Individual Pupil Mobility Scheme under the Comenius Programme. Between 2007 and 2008 EFIL co-ordinated the various project phases and in 2010 the European Commission launched the new initiative (EFIL 2008). This substantial contribution of EFIL in the development of pupil exchange programmes in the framework of the European institutions is both an expression of the effective pursuit of the AFS mission in the European context and of the opportunities for innovation that Europe provides to international youth organisations.
Elisa Briga
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
20 167
D Youth work practice: the European Citizenship Trimester Programme Concept
Through co-operation with the Council of Europe and the European Union, participation in several trainings and the development of a manual “Promoting citizenship in Europe” (EFIL 2006), EFIL built expertise on European Citizenship. In 2008 it explored the possibility of actively contributing to the promotion of the European ideals by launching a European citizenship exchange programme based on the AFS theory and practice of pupil exchanges. Thus the European Citizenship Trimester Programme (ECTP) was born, providing European youth aged 15 to 18 the opportunity to spend three months in a host family and school in another country in Europe. The most innovative aspect of the programme is its focus on active European citizenship, especially during the session in Brussels where all participants meet before returning to their home countries, with the objective to: • raise awareness about identity and diversity in Europe, drawing from the exchange experiences and the cultural diversity present at the Brussels session; • empower participants to become active citizens in their communities upon return to their home countries; • trigger refection on the intercultural experiences and the reintegration process in the home country.
In 2009 the programme involved 107 pupils from 13 countries and it grew quickly, attracting more and more interest on the part of EFIL members and their volunteers, reaching 141 participants and 16 countries in 2010, and 169 participants and 20 countries in 2011. Two thirds of the participants are females and the main sending organisations are Intercultura (Italy) and AFS Belgium Flanders, constituting half the total of participants. The End-of-Stay Session in Brussels is run by an international team of volunteers from EFIL members.
The following section will offer an overview of the development of the programme in the AFS-EFIL framework. ECTP: an AFS/EFIL exchange programme
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The ECTP was born as an EFIL initiative in line with its mission, namely supporting its members in realising the AFS Strategic Plan, Vision and Mission, with the rationale of: • increasing intra-European exchange numbers in Europe by offering a new Europefocused programme, and attracting pupils with the unique offer of the experience of the End-of-Stay Session in Brussels, the content of which is closely linked to the programme itself; • addressing a different target group: pupils who cannot take part in an academic year programme for reasons of fnance or time, pupils who would like to go on an exchange earlier, pupils who would like to do an exchange without much disruption to their school curriculum; • offering AFS participants and volunteers a programme providing content on the actual and relevant topic of European Citizenship, besides intercultural learning.
The ECTP has been promoted and managed by each partner along its “normal AFS orientation cycle” of pupil exchange programmes, which has been functioning for decades.
EFIL’s European Citizenship Trimester Programme
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
168
The AFS orientation cycle consists of support to the learning of participants during preparation, the exchange itself and after their return to the home country. This support is provided mainly by AFS volunteers and includes ongoing contact with participants and “orientation events”, namely structured non-formal education activities and facilitated personal refection. The orientation events include the selection and the pre-departure orientation during the preparation phase, the on-arrival, mid-stay and end-of-stay orientation during the exchange and the re-entry event following return to their home countries (AFS 2012b).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
These phases have a structure and content on which AFS programmes base their quality, therefore orientations for ECTP participants are done within this framework, together with the pupils participating in the other AFS exchanges. The content of European Citizenship had therefore to be included in these preexisting structures. For this purpose, EFIL developed and distributed to its member organisations a manual for sending and hosting orientations based on the “T-Kit on European Citizenship”, and a number of supporting measures have been developed by EFIL and AFS organisations in Europe to answer to the specifc needs of ECTP participants. In fact, orientations should not only include content on the concept of European Citizenship, but also preparation for situations that are different from the ones experienced by participants in other AFS exchange programmes. First of all, they might face diffculties in understanding the link between their AFS exchange experience with a global perspective and the concept of European Citizenship: why should they narrow their thinking to the European borders, if during their exchange they meet AFS exchange participants also from non-European countries and they do not feel substantially different from them? Moreover, the fact of coming to the session in Brussels between leaving their host families and returning to their home countries can generate specifc emotional and motivational problems, with participants feeling anonymous in the new environment at a time when they may require personal attention to feel comfortable to talk and share their feelings. Further, volunteers in charge of preparing and counselling participants also perceive the concept of European Citizenship as vague and abstract, do not feel confdent with the topic and are not always aware of the specifc situations faced by ECTP participants. They have stated that they can “hardly ft in the European Citizenship aspects in the orientations prepared for participants to the other AFS exchanges” and consider it “more important to work with the participants on other aspects of their intercultural learning process”. The challenges faced by volunteers with the new content focus are due to the fact that most of them, during their AFS exchange programme and within the organisation, have been exposed mainly to intercultural learning workshops, and this is what they associate with orientations.
The analysis of the development of the ECTP shows that, although it exists thanks to the valuable AFS orientation cycle, this framework has also created issues for the adequate preparation of participants on the topic of European Citizenship. These challenges suggest that the historical tension between global/AFS and European/ EFIL has an impact on youth work practice. ECTP: an exchange programme embedded in European youth work Despite the challenges faced in adding a new content area to AFS orientations, ECTP is today a programme with its own learning concept, and its framework and content are recognised as different from the currently running AFS programmes, although it was born out of the AFS experience.
Elisa Briga
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
20 169
During the trimester exchange participants develop intercultural understanding through informal and non-formal learning. The informal learning takes place thanks to daily interactions with the society in the host country, the host family, friends, other exchange pupils, and the ongoing support of AFS volunteers. Non-formal education activities offered at the orientations in the hosting country at different moments of the AFS cycle (on-arrival, mid-stay, end-of-stay) allow participants to refect on their informal learning. Through discussions with people from all over the world that are participating in other AFS exchange programmes, they refect on identity and, while developing a global identity as a citizen of the world, they also come to defne what makes them European. In addition, they discover differences and similarities between values and behaviours in societies across the world, and therefore refect on what citizenship is and whether citizens of Europe share any commonalities.
These refections on identity and citizenship are precious elements on which the additional learning mobility of the Brussels session builds. The session in Brussels is structured in order to create a bridge between the exchange in the host country and the re-entry, providing the setting to develop competences related to “European citizenship” and “Active Citizenship”, as well as two key moments of the AFS orientation cycle: guided refection with the support of volunteers in small groups and re-entry orientation.
In particular, the frst day is devoted to refection and sharing of the exchange experience, followed by a session on the concept of Europe where participants discover the EU and the Council of Europe and discuss European identity under different perspectives. During the sessions on Europe, the contributions from participants from the Russian Federation and Turkey, but also from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia, make for interesting discussions.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
On the second day, the participants visit Brussels, frst the EU institutions, and then the city centre. In the different editions, participants have visited the European Commission, the European Parliament or the Parlamentarium, and the newly opened and interactive Visitors’ Centre of the European Parliament, which offers an overview of the European project and the functioning of the EU.
Finally, on the third day participants attend sessions on different aspects of Active Citizenship and then refect on the return to their home country. The sessions on Active Citizenship provide the opportunity to refect on how European citizenship can be translated in concrete behaviours and attitudes towards issues faced by today’s society, and expose participants and volunteers to the developments in European youth policy and youth work which EFIL follows closely. The sessions tackle topics such as youth rights and youth participation, human rights, and social inclusion. Also, the EU funding programme Youth in Action is introduced, outlining how the European Voluntary Service and youth initiatives specifcally support Active Citizenship projects for and by young people. The sessions on Active Citizenship link well with the following and fnal session on re-entry, where participants think about how they will re-adapt to the life in their home countries and how their behaviours and attitudes might change. The ECTP and especially its Brussels session improved considerably through its three editions thanks to feedback and evaluation, and in particular because of the increasing support from EFIL members and especially AFS volunteers, the driving forces of the organisation. Those who volunteered at the Brussels session discovered a European dimension of volunteering, received training on European Citizenship and became great supporters of the programme in their home countries.
EFIL’s European Citizenship Trimester Programme
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
170
The ECTP, thanks to a learning concept which blends intercultural learning and European Citizenship, provides a unique experience and participants at the Brussels session evaluate it positively, valuing the learning opportunity given by this additional European dimension to the trimester exchange. Moreover, the awareness of and interest in the programme is spreading among volunteers who, being in charge of orientations, are key for the standardisation of the content of the programme across the organisation.
D Future perspectives EFIL members are well aware of the value of ECTP and its challenges and held a meeting to discuss the future of the programme in September 2011 in Brussels. First of all, there was agreement on the need for a standardisation of the programme across countries and for a holistic approach to the experience itself, from preparation to re-entry. Objectives were rephrased to ensure that they encompass the whole period of the exchange, and not only the Brussels session, so as to: • gain a wider concept of Europe; • appreciate European diversity; • recognise the importance of Active Citizenship; • be motivated to be an Active Citizen; • have the opportunity to implement Active Citizenship throughout the exchange;
Moreover, a calendar was prepared, outlining the essentials of the programme in each phase of the AFS cycle.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
It was also decided that the programme would focus more on the topic of Active Citizenship through the development of a personal task/project by the participants, such as exploring a specifc aspect of Active Citizenship in the hosting country by writing a blog or essay, and making videos, pictures or interviews. The Brussels session would be an integral part of the programme, being the tool supporting and motivating participants for their personal projects/tasks, and providing the connection between the projects and the wider concept of Active Citizenship in Europe. There are still concerns regarding the capacity of EFIL members to fulfl this request and the fear of overloading participants that are already going through an intense intercultural experience. However, there is a commitment from their side and the belief that through its special focus, ECTP will provide innovation in the frame of AFS, building on the intercultural aspects of citizenship to explore concrete opportunities for the participation of young people in society. Standardisation of the quality of the programme not only requires efforts on the part of EFIL members but also from EFIL itself. It was suggested that EFIL should have had a clearer guidance role in the running of the programme by providing standard promotional material, a booklet for host families and a booklet and online tools for participants to assist them in the learning path throughout the programme, from preparation to re-entry. Moreover, EFIL will run specifc trainings on European Citizenship and ECTP addressed to volunteers and staff, also with the support of the Youth in Action Programme, with the main aim of developing tools and models for the standard preparation for all participants to the ECTP in the different countries, within the framework of the AFS cycle. In order to increase awareness and interest among volunteers, training sessions will also be offered at the Volunteers Summer Summit, the yearly training and networking event organised by EFIL for 200 AFS key volunteers in Europe. EFIL is also considering a more extensive use of social media and e-learning as tools for improving ECTP and bridging the structural challenges
Elisa Briga
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
20 171
faced by EFIL members in delivering standard content as part of the programme and also to train volunteers. These improvements in the programme and commitments on the side of EFIL and its members show a strong belief in the ECTP and the engagement to provide an innovative and quality programme on European Citizenship through the development of new valuable orientation models based on the AFS cycle.
In conclusion, although developing a European Citizenship programme on the well-established dynamics of AFS organisations creates challenges, the programme itself would not exist or be possible without its orientation cycle, managed by its members along with all the other AFS programmes. However, only the contribution of EFIL as a European federation could create the environment for the conceptualisation of the programme itself and promote its continuous improvement thanks to its exposure to youth policy and the realities of youth work in Europe. Thanks to its multiple identity as both a European and global youth organisation, EFIL has been able to create the ECTP, enriching European youth work with AFS global identity and vice versa.
D References AFS (2012a), About AFS, available at www.afs.org/about/about-afs/, accessed 1 September 2012. AFS (2012b), AFS Orientation Framework, available at www.afsglobal.org/ LearningCenter/LinkClick.aspx?fleticket=Gq%2FEUnJHocY%3D&tabid=11868, accessed 1 September 2012. Partnership Council of Europe and European Commission Training-Youth (2003), Under construction, citizenship, youth and Europe, T-Kit on European Citizenship, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, available at http://youth-partnership-eu. coe.int/youth-partnership/documents/Publications/T_kits/7/tkit7.pdf, accessed 1 September 2012. Department Education, Culture and Heritage, Youth and Sport of the Council of Europe (2004), 50 years of the European Cultural Convention, available at www.coe.int/t/ dg4/CulturalConvention/Source/Bilan50_EN.pdf, accessed 1 September 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
EFIL (1999), ESSSE Evaluation and planning meeting for future activities, EFIL, Colle di Val d’Elsa (Italy), 9-12 September 1999.
EFIL (2006), Europe through our hearts and minds – Promoting citizenship in Europe, available at www.efl.afs.org/efl_publications/other_publications/educationalpublications/. EFIL (2008), EFIL – Individual Pupil Mobility Project fnal report, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/more-information/doc/pupilmobility_en.pdf, accessed 1 September 2012.
EFIL (2011), 1971-2011 40 years of EFIL, available at www.efl.afs.org/news-andevents/article/?article_id=884, accessed 3 September 2012. EFIL (2012), EFIL’s priorities, available at www.efl.afs.org/about-efl/priorities/, accessed 1 September 2012.
EFIL’s European Citizenship Trimester Programme
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Rita Bergstein, Kristiina Pernits
Youthpass the educational practice D Introduction
Y
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
outhpass, the European recognition tool for youth work activities, was introduced in 2007. Established within the framework of the EU Youth in Action Programme, it serves as a recognition tool for the youth mobility projects supported by the programme. Since the start of the development of Youthpass, it has been considered a concept that reaches beyond a certifcate. The so-called Youthpass process provides a framework for refecting on, becoming aware of, planning and assessing one’s learning. The process is a prominent part of Youthpass that on the one hand supports the quality of the contents of the certifcate, and on the other hand serves as a carrier of the educational value of (international) youth work.
During the strategic implementation of Youthpass and its process within international mobility projects across Europe, experience and refection on the practice has shown that Youthpass has specifc potential to support the development of the learning competence. Acquiring competences to become an active lifelong learner needs a supported process. This chapter offers a frst attempt to explain the potential of Youthpass in turning an international experience into a real learning mobility experience.
1
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
174
D YiA as a learning environment The projects supported by the EU Youth in Action Programme (YiA) are generally viewed as non-formal learning. They cover a broad variety of topics; are set or at least greatly infuenced by the individuality and interests of the participants; the learning activities are structured and planned with an aim to learn about something; the participation in the projects is voluntary. A big role in the projects is also played by elements of informal learning – unstructured and unplanned learning that happens in the context of the project, for example by interaction between the participants – and in some cases also by learning that can be characterised as quite formal. The latter cases can be observed, for example, when there is close co-operation in the project with a formal education institution, or when the design of the project does not leave space for fexibility determined by the participants. In most cases, though, YiA projects are to be seen as nonformal learning projects. As such, they have a big potential to meet the needs and interests of the participants.
Regarding learners in a project supported by the YiA Programme, three actors can be identifed: the participant, the youth leader/mentor/youth worker within a project, and the project organiser. All of them enter a specifc learning environment where the mobility experience is the key to learning possibilities. The learning mobility experience is characterised by a stay abroad and/or contact with other (young) people from a different culture with a different language, a programme designed according to the type of mobility involved, an appropriate variety of methods and methodologies and accompanying support through preparation, on-going refection, regular evaluation and a follow-up.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
A few resources provide an insight into the learning results of people who have participated in the YiA Programme. The European Commission regularly carries out monitoring exercises to evaluate certain aspects of the YiA projects. According to the last survey (European Commission 2011), most participants confrm the increase of their competences at least to a certain extent in all eight key competences of lifelong learning (European Commission 2006). Furthermore, they agree that the experience made them better aware of themselves regarding their future educational and professional pathways. Participating in the projects positively infuenced their attitudes towards other cultures, raised awareness of diversity in society, and prepared them for active participation in societal and political issues. This is largely supported by the fndings of the study carried out within the YiA participants in Germany (IKAB et al. 2011). The majority of the young people answering the questionnaire thought that as a result of the project, they are better aware of other cultures, and that their knowledge about Europe and the EU has increased. A big proportion of respondents are more interested in European policies and think that young people should become more active in European issues.
The learning environment created in the YiA projects depends on the facilitation of the learning in different activity types. For example, a youth exchange with participants from six different countries about environmental issues provides different learning opportunities from a voluntary service project where a young woman carries out her service in a youth centre abroad. On the level of discoveries and fndings there might be similar experiences when it comes to intercultural learning, social learning, self-awareness and language learning. The duration of the experience could infuence the depth of learning.
Rita Bergstein, Kristiina Pernits
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
21 175
The intensity of the learning depends much on the facilitation of the accompanying process. The engagement and capacities of youth leaders in youth exchanges or of the mentor in European Voluntary Service projects have an important impact, together with their experience or educational background. With the help of the various educational methods used in the youth feld, the learning process of individual participants can be deepened. Often, the methods are chosen so that they ft various learning preferences, but also support the participants in making their own conclusions and discoveries on certain issues. The group can be used as a further source to support the individual learning experience through feedback and sharing. For youth workers/mentors/youth leaders of projects, the challenge to create such a learning environment offers possibilities to question their established practice, use the learning environment for their own learning, and develop their existing educational practice further. Their professional and personal learning process consists of setting up the learning environment in co-operation with their partners, providing individual learning opportunities, group learning and learning around a theme, developing the attitudes necessary to facilitate the learning processes of others, and so on. Organisers of projects also encounter learning potential through the implementation of a learning mobility project. They are often involved in the organisational development of their organisation, in supporting volunteers or professional workers in their projects and/or developing concrete projects with international partners. However, as currently the main target group for Youthpass is participants of the YiA projects, we now focus the discussion on the learning of the participants.
D Youthpass process
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Since July 2007, participants of the projects supported by the YiA Programme have been able to ask for the Youthpass certifcate to confrm their participation and, more importantly, describe their learning results from the project. The recognition instrument has been gradually, step by step, introduced to the various activity types of the programme. At the time of writing this chapter, it can be acquired for participation in transnational youth exchanges, national and transnational youth initiative projects, European Voluntary Service, and training and networking activities of youth workers. By the beginning of September 2012, more than 176 000 certifcates had been issued all around Europe (Youthpass database, retrieved 11 September 2012). Although Youthpass can also be used as a simple confrmation of participation, it has been designed to hold most value for the participant, in case the person also goes through a process of refection on the progress of his or her learning during the project. Such a process of continuous refections throughout the different phases of a project is called the Youthpass process. The role of the youth worker, trainer, coach, and so on in this process is to support the refection by asking helpful questions and providing resources, including time and methodology.
The handbook explaining the Youthpass process, “Youthpass Unfolded” (SALTO Training and Cooperation Resource Centre et al. 2012), describes the different phases of the process, and their interaction, with the help of the scheme in Figure 1.
Youthpass the educational practice
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
176
Figure 1: Youthpass process
Youthpass process Backstage preparation and facilitation
Identify learning moments Setting learning directions
Igniting passion for learning
Describe own learning outcomes
Reflect Reflect Reflect
Become more aware of your learning
Remain open for unexpected
Document learning on the way
Know yourself better as a learner
Youthpass certificate
Learning with others
The scheme also illustrates the non-linear nature of the of the Youthpass process, where different elements can be realised at various moments of the project, and can also be repeated or take place in a different order. Participants in the project can identify the learning that took place, revise their learning directions, become more passionate about learning as such in the process, and so on.
D Youthpass process in the youth feld: parallels with self-directed and transformative learning Self-directed learning, one of the most recognised learning concepts concerning adult (thereby including young adult) learners, has been described through a number of characteristics. Knowles (1975), cited in Lowry 1989 defnes it as:
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
a process in which individuals take the initiative, with or without the help of others, to diagnose their learning needs, formulate learning goals, identify resources for learning, select and implement learning strategies, and evaluate learning outcomes
There are evident parallels between the Youthpass process and the process of selfdirected learning. Firstly, the group of learners is formed according to their interest in a certain topic. In addition to the general aims and objectives of the activity, the participants are invited to set their individual learning goals for the project. They do so in co-operation with the leaders of the project or with each other. Sometimes, the individual goals may also be accompanied by the learning goals of the group taking part in the project. The educational processes in YiA projects are learner oriented. The aims, expected results and methodology should depend on the participants of the project. As a facilitated group activity there is not always room for the participants to choose their favourite methods; however, the participation in the activities is voluntary and can in most cases be skipped if not suitable for the learner. Anyhow, the methodology used for facilitating the learning processes is typically varied and includes an important element of experiential learning.
An important part of the Youthpass process is the evaluation of the progress. During the activity as well as at the end, the participants take stock of the progress made
Rita Bergstein, Kristiina Pernits
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
21 177
regarding their learning results, and also, if necessary, revise the learning goals. This is supported either by peer learners or by the facilitator of the project. Such a process requires a certain degree of capacity for abstraction and is often not easy for people not used to observing and taking stock of their learning. Often in the process the participants become more self-conscious about their learning abilities and preferred ways of learning, potentially also becoming better aware of the possibilities they could use for enhancing their learning. This suggested outcome of the Youthpass process is in turn well connected to the concept of transformative learning. Transformative learning refers to the process by which we transform our taken-for-granted frames of reference (meaning perspectives, habits of mind, mindsets, mental models) to make them more inclusive, discriminating, open, emotionally capable of change, and refective, so that they may generate revised beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or justifed (Mezirow and Associates 2000, cited in Stevens et al. 2010). Many types of activities granted by YiA support the transformational kind of learning of the participants, as young people have to independently cope with a new cultural environment or a challenging task ahead of them which can be interpreted as a “disorienting dilemma” in, for instance, EVS and in youth initiatives. The participants have to critically assess their former assumptions, explore possibilities for new roles and relationships, build competence and self-confdence in their new roles, and so on. The Youthpass process assists the participants in these refections by providing a framework. Furthermore, one aspect of transformative learning is also discovering how one learns from the experience, and the presuppositions involved in learning (Merriam, Cafarella and Baumgartner 2007, cited in Stevens et al. 2010). A study carried out by Stevens, Gerber, and Hendra (2010) demonstrates that learners going through a refection on their previous learning experiences undergo a transformative process: they demonstrate increased confdence, and a change in self-evaluation and self-perception. It can therefore be considered that participating in YiA projects provides an important, transformational learning experience through the design of the actual project, but also through being encouraged to refect on the learning experience as part of the process.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Further implications It is important to conduct a Youthpass process in learning mobility projects in order to provide an even more meaningful experience for the learners and to create a bigger change. A study conducted by Kenneth S. Rhee (2003) confrms that people going through continuous refections during their study programme assess their competences higher than those who don’t refect. Although there is no reason to believe that the actual increase in the competence or performance on the theme of the project is bigger when the Youthpass process is applied, it is evident that through the continuous refections, the participants are better aware of the change in their competence. This, in its turn, enables developing higher self-esteem when it comes to self-evaluation on the particular competences, and thereby more self-confdent action when choosing future pathways. Furthermore, the competency acquisition process model (Boyatzis 1982, cited in Rhee 2003) suggests that cognitive awareness precedes behavioural demonstration of competency. Therefore, it is possible that people who think they can perform a specifc task better than before are also more capable of accepting and fulflling the challenging task than those who don’t think they have improved. We have described the parallels of the Youthpass process to self-directed learning. Self-directed learning is widely thought to improve learning for a number of reasons. First, people learn more effciently by selecting only the information and resources
Youthpass the educational practice
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
178
necessary for their learning interest. Second, they manage their own learning in a way that ensures the most results (e.g. they choose the tasks that they feel they can understand more easily frst, rather than take on too diffcult tasks. Third, independently solving problems probably also necessitates a deeper analysis of the structure of the problem (Gureckis and Markant 2012). Further, by experiencing the Youthpass process, that is by pursuing their own learning interests in the project and following them up, the participants of the projects may enhance their ability to also be more self-directed learners in the future. The impact Youthpass has made on the participants and benefciaries of YiA will be investigated by the European Commission’s impact survey, to be published in spring 2013. Further research questions need to be addressed by future studies, to provide more evidence about how Youthpass infuences individual and organisational development. Considering the analysis above, a few directions for future developments can already be suggested, to enhance the aspect of self-directed and transformative learning in the mobility programme. First, the support to the process of refecting on one’s learning experiences can be widened to occasions and environments beyond single project experiences. This would help to place the learning happening within the project into a wider context and enhance possibilities to see the evolution of one’s competences. Second, as described above, youth workers and project organisers also go through important learning processes which deserve to be refected on, and documented.
D Conclusions It can be stated that Youthpass supports the emergence and development of a culture of refecting on learning processes and results in the projects supported by the YiA Programme. For example, numerous methods have been developed throughout Europe in recent years that facilitate this refection. Many have been gathered into the handbook “Youthpass Unfolded” (SALTO Training and Cooperation Resource Centre et al. 2012). Considering the evident parallels between the Youthpass process and self-directed learning leading to a transformational change, there is reason to believe that Youthpass infuences the culture of learning also at an individual level.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Youthpass is also a certifcate, a visible outcome of learning from a project that can be presented to persons and institutions important for the future pathway of the learner. However, it is the process of arriving at the description of the learning results on the certifcate that helps to make a mobility experience a true learning experience.
D References European Commission (2006), Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on key competences for lifelong learning, available at http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/ll-learning/keycomp_en.pdf, accessed 18 September 2012. European Commission (2011), Youth in Action – Evaluation and monitoring, available at http://ec.europa.eu/youth/focus/youth-in-action-monitoring-survey_en.htm, accessed 11 September 2012.
Gureckis T. M. and Markant D. B. (2012), Self-directed learning: A cognitive and computational perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, vol 7, 5, pp. 464-81.
Rita Bergstein, Kristiina Pernits
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
21 179
IKAB e.V., Forschungsgruppe Jugend und Europa am CAP, JUGEND für Europa (2011), “Unter der Lupe”. Bericht zur zweiten Phase der wissenschaftlichen Begleitung von JUGEND IN AKTION in Deutschland, available at www.jugendfuereuropa.de/ downloads/4-20-2924/UdL-Gesamtbericht-2010publ.pdf, accessed 18 September 2012.
Lowry C. M. (1989), “Supporting and facilitating self-directed learning”, ERIC Digest No. 93. ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Columbus, Ohio.
Rhee K. S. (2003), “Self-directed learning: To be aware or not to be aware”, Journal of Management Education vol. 27, 5, 568-89. SALTO Training & Cooperation, SALTO Inclusion, JUGEND für Europa (2012), Youthpass unfolded. Practical tips and hands-on methods for making most of the Youthpass process, available at https://www.youthpass.eu/en/youthpass/downloads/ youthpass-unfolded, accessed 18 September 2012. Stevens K., Gerber D. and Hendra R. (2010), “Transformational learning through prior learning assessment”, Adult Education Quarterly, vol. 60, 4, 377-404.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Youthpass, available at www.youthpass.eu, accessed 18 September 2012.
Youthpass the educational practice
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Tamara Thorpe, Jennifer Watson
Experiential learning in youth mobility programmes: a tool to plan, monitor and evaluate D Introduction
S
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
ince 1951, CISV International has been offering international mobility programmes to children and young people, starting at age 11. Our mission is to educate and inspire action for a more just and peaceful world believing that we must begin with the children. Through peace education, CISV programmes foster Active Global Citizenship by focusing on four educational content areas: human rights, diversity, sustainable development, and confict and resolution.
CISV has 69 participating countries, with 25 of those within Europe. Each country is a National Association and can include as few as one or as many as 25 Chapters. Each year, Chapters and National Associations host programmes locally, nationally and internationally throughout the world. CISV programmes include camps, family exchanges, and service learning and youth leadership development programmes.
2
The evaluation of these programmes is a quality assurance process to ensure we know we are good at what we are doing. Evaluation empowers CISV to increase the impact of our programmes on its participants, improve the delivery
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
182
of our programmes, and ensure we are achieving our organisational and programme goals. Based on a model of evaluation as a cyclic process CISV has developed the “Programme Director’s Planning and Evaluation Form” to be used before, during and at the end of a programme to assist in: • planning the delivery of educational content; • monitoring the progress towards identifed educational goals; • evaluating the quality of the learning curriculum based upon the achievement of these goals by the cohort of participants.
Effective planning of delivery of educational content and monitoring of progress should enhance the experience for all participants. Records of achievement at the end of the programme are collated to demonstrate overall programme effectiveness and then used to identify areas where any future training of programme leaders and/or staff may be benefcial. To support the implementation of this evaluation, CISV revised basic guides to educational principles, methods and content. A comprehensive research project was conducted to evaluate this and its results are included in this chapter, as well as suggestions for the adoption of this competence-based evaluation process in other organisations.
D CISVÕs educational approach Within all CISV programmes, our educational approach is “Learning by Doing”, based upon David Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle. This framework is used in conjunction with the four educational content areas to develop educational activities that are engaging, interactive, fun, and address different types of learning preferences. Kolb’s theory is to create a learning cycle which offers a Concrete Experience (Do), Refective Observation (Refect), Abstract Conceptualisation (Generalise), and Active Experimentation (Apply). Learning begins by “doing” which allows participants to have a tangible or hands-on experience with a topic. Participants then “refect” upon this experience through discussion, debrief, or other refective activities. Next they “generalise” or consider how to incorporate this experience with their current understanding of the topic, and then “apply” their learning through new attitudes, skills, or knowledge (Webb 2006).
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D Evaluating CISVÕs non-formal education CISV volunteers are trained in experiential learning and how to combine this approach with our educational content to develop programmes for our participants. To ensure volunteers are providing quality educational activities within all programmes, CISV has developed the Programme Directors Planning and Evaluation Form (PDPEF) to facilitate the planning, monitoring, and evaluation of the educational content of these programmes. Evaluation is a cyclic process that articulates learning outcomes, tracks achievement of those outcomes, interprets the fndings and uses those fndings to improve learning opportunities or programme quality (Kobuke et al. 2007). Based on this model of evaluation the PDPEF was designed to be used before, during and at the end of a programme to assist in: • planning the delivery of educational content; • monitoring the progress towards identifed educational goals; • evaluating the quality of the learning curriculum based upon the achievement of these goals by the cohort of participants.
Tamara Thorpe, Jennifer Watson
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
22 183
Competency-based evaluation is at the foundation of the PDPEF, both in its design and implementation. A competency is defned as a set of attitudes, skills and knowledge necessary for a particular role, in our case, Active Global Citizenship (Gaudet et al. 2008). Therefore, each CISV programme has identifed four core competences, described as goals, necessary to facilitate the development of Active Global Citizenship. Each goal is supported by a set of indicators which identify key attitudes, skills and knowledge which refect success within a particular goal. Our camp-based programme for ages 14 and 15, for example, has as Goal 2 “Encourage social responsibility towards the community”. The indicators are: • is able to identify current community issues and confict; • is willing to perform an act of contribution to local community after the programme ends; • is able to contribute ideas on how to apply what they learned to everyday life; • is able to act in an inclusive way.
In the planning phase, programme leaders use the goals and indicators to develop a learning curriculum for the programme. This includes various games, activities and structures within the programme setting which will facilitate the participants in demonstrating the indicators and achieving the goals.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
In the planning phase, programme leaders also determine the evidence they will use and collect throughout the programme. Evidence tracks participants’ demonstration of the assigned attitudes, skills and knowledge within a programme. Evidence can include observations, discussions, photographs or videos, participation, surveys or questionnaires, crafts, or journals. The possibilities for evidence are quite extensive and are based upon the type of learning curriculum. Collecting evidence throughout the programme enables leaders to monitor the progress of the goals at regular intervals.
Monitoring the progress of the goals and indicators provides programme leaders with information that informs any need to adjust the educational content. Within programmes, leaders and volunteers can adapt and adjust the learning curriculum to provide participants with additional opportunities to learn or develop particular attitudes, skills and knowledge. If a signifcant number of participants demonstrate the indicators, the programme leaders can be assured that they are providing quality educational content. While the PDPEF allows programme leaders to evaluate the effectiveness of the learning curriculum, it is important to note that the PDPEF does not necessarily provide an accurate measurement of each participant’s learning outcomes at this point in time; it does, however, provide insight into the quality of the educational activities within a programme. At the end of each programme, the programme director provides a fnal evaluation of the programme goals and indicators by completing the Group Evaluation section of the PDPEF where they indicate whether or not a participant has demonstrated any evidence of success with each of the goals and indicators represented in Figure 1.
Experiential learning in youth mobility programmes: a tool to plan, monitor and evaluate
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
184
Figure 1: Group Evaluation section from the Programme Directors Planning and Evaluation Form
At the end of each year’s programme cycle, the Evaluation and Research Committee (EVR) collates the data and provides each programme with a summary report which refects the number of “yes” responses indicated on the PDPEFs for each goal and indicator as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2: Annual Summary for Summer Camp Goal 3
Goal 3 86% 75%
72%
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
66%
Goal 3. Developing Self Awareness
3 a) Lead daily programme with minimal leaders assistance
3 b) Contribute to debriefing by sharing personal feelings and thoughts
3 c) Express independent ideas to promote group development
3 d) Increase their confidence
Then the data are assessed by the educational and programme committees to determine actions which can be taken to improve the percentage of a given goal or indicator. Typically, lower percentages are attributed to the need for increased educational resources, training or programme delivery. The quantitative data are triangulated with the qualitative data that the relevant committees receive from training evaluations, national reports, interviews and direct communications with programme directors, leaders, volunteers and participants.
Tamara Thorpe, Jennifer Watson
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
22 185
The data are then compared to former years, providing a yearly comparison for each goal and its indicators. This comparison provides insight into any improvements of a particular goal and its indicators based upon any actions which may have to be taken to improve it. However, this comparison has proven to be less reliable as goals and indicators have changed from year to year since the implementation of this new evaluation process in an effort to improve the quality of specifc goals and indicators. In 2011, a moratorium on changes to goals and indicators was adopted to ensure better yearly comparisons of the data. This moratorium will allow for a three-year analysis, providing committees with more reliable information about the quality of the educational content and any trends over a period of time.
The implementation of this evaluation process since 2008 has resulted in an intensive learning curve for the organisation. It has required extensive training on evaluation and the use of the PDPEF within programmes. The organisation has also developed support materials to assist with the training and implementation of the form into programmes. Evaluating the materials, training and the implementation of the PDPEF was a critical next step to this new process of evaluation.
D Evaluating the evaluation process In addition to using experiential learning as the basis of its educational programmes, CISV uses the somewhat similar idea of action research (McNiff and Whitehead 2010) to consider the impact of programme innovations. In this context, in 2009 the organisation approved a research project to evaluate the implementation and impact of PDPEF as well as some other recently developed educational materials, in particular:
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
• the CISV Passport for Active Global Citizenship, published in 2009: an introduction to CISV’s approach to peace education, built on the statement of purpose that “CISV educates and inspires action for a more just and peaceful world.” • Big Ed: Big Education Guide for Active Global Citizenship: a more comprehensive version of CISV’s educational principles and approach, written in parallel and structured in similar sections to the CISV Passport.
Responses to questionnaires distributed to CISV adult leaders and staff members for programmes in 2009 and 2010 and informal interviews with 19 adults who had taken leadership roles in these years indicated that the CISV Passport had been well received and was widely used by leaders and some older participants. Several National Associations had published translations to facilitate local use in both training and promotion, but there was not yet a clear picture of how it has been used for the latter purpose. Use of the four content areas (diversity, human rights, confict and resolution, sustainable development) on a rotating basis, as annual emphases for CISV programmes, was becoming embedded in practice. Use of the experiential educational model (Do, Refect, Generalise, Apply) was apparent in its frst three stages but it was appreciated that “application” might occur after completion of the programme. Big Ed was used in some training workshops but in practice was not well known among leaders. As the key guide to education in CISV it would be hoped that more of those who were actively involved in running programmes would be familiar with such a key document. Also, completion of PDPEF had become obligatory as a means of data collection for CISV International. Comments in interviews suggested that it was being used as an evaluation tool but it was not clear whether it was used to facilitate planning.
Experiential learning in youth mobility programmes: a tool to plan, monitor and evaluate
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
186
As a novel tool which combines the two functions of planning and evaluation, further clarifcation of its use is needed.
D The PDPEF education section in programmes for ages 14 to 15 The PDPEF has several sections for collection of information about programme participants and related formalities but the acronym has become associated in particular with the education section (part 2) and especially with the completion of the Group Evaluation Form (GEF), occasionally with the use of the Individual Evaluation Forms (IEF). For this aspect of research the indicators developed for the programme goals were converted to statements to use in a Predictive and Refective Questionnaire (PaRQ) so that the youth participants could score their attainment on a seven-point Likert scale (Disagree strongly, Disagree, Disagree a little, Do not know, Agree a little, Agree, Agree a lot). They were asked to complete one form at the beginning of the programme to indicate where they felt they were on each indicator at that time and to predict where they felt they would be at the end of the programme. When it came to the end of the programme they were asked to note on a similar form where they felt they were now and to refect on where they felt they had been at the beginning of the programme. On this second questionnaire there were also two open questions about what the youth participants felt they had learned in the programme and about what they thought they had learned about themselves.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Youth perceptions of their learning The youth participants’ self-scores generally showed movement towards “agree” or “strongly agree” from their score at the beginning of the programme to their score at the end. Very occasionally one of the participants gave him/herself a slightly lower fnal score on one indicator, but the overall picture suggested awareness of learning having taken place. This awareness was echoed in the comments in the open questions. Half of the participants in the Summer Camp (age 14) mentioned learning about other cultures, over a third suggested that there had been an improvement in their English or language skills, and more than 25% stated that they had learned a lot about planning activities. Similarly, in the Youth Meeting for age 14-15 (YM) over a third of participants suggested that their English had improved, while others mentioned improvement in communication abilities, and 40% stated that they had learned a lot about other countries or cultures. A quarter made comments that indicated growth in self-confdence. A quarter of the YM participants also specifcally mentioned learning about the YM theme (Freedom) and a similar number mentioned learning about stereotypes (the subject of two major activities in the programme).
Adult perceptions of youth learning Leaders’ perceptions of each participant’s learning, as recorded on the GEF and IEF, were compared with the participants’ own perceptions of their learning, as recorded on the youth questionnaires. In most cases these were in agreement. However, there were a few cases where a participant felt s/he had achieved an indicator but the leader disagreed. In the Summer Camp this discrepancy was most common in indicators that implied a signifcant level of language (English) competence, with leaders suggesting that several participants were not able to contribute to group discussions or to suggest clear solutions to problems, whereas the youth participants indicated that they felt they were able to do this satisfactorily (see Figure 2 above). Comments from leaders and youth participants suggested that they had differing
Tamara Thorpe, Jennifer Watson
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
22 187
perspectives on language competence, with the youth participants feeling that their competence had improved whereas the leaders felt that the participants in question did not have a suffcient level of language competence to take an active part in these discussions. In the YM comparison the largest area of discrepancy was in relation to participants receiving training on how to develop the theme, with leaders questioning when and where this training should be provided. There was also some concern over the indicator “contribute to debriefng after each activity”, where it was noted that some participants took part effectively in some discussions, but not in all of them. LeadersÕ views of purposes and use of PDPEF
The data from informal interviews with leaders in the Summer Camp and YM were coded and analysed thematically. Nine of the fourteen leaders interviewed had experience in previous CISV leadership roles so included comments on their experience in previous programmes as well as in their current programme. Most commonly, in both experiences, the leaders saw the PDPEF as a means for evaluating the progress of the youth participants. One leader stated that he felt it is “a kind of reporting mechanism for head offce” and continued, “I probably don’t use it as much as I could during the programme … to me it’s a kind of back-up thing.” He went on to explain that it was not clear how the information entered was to be used, suggesting that although it is not diffcult to fll in “it’s just one of those things that’s got to be done.” Some other leaders found it more complex in that they did not like having to make a “yes or no” decision on whether an indicator had been achieved. There were various suggestions for marking scales towards achievement or having space to note more detail, and one comment that youth participants might show behaviour on one day from which achievement of an indicator would be noted, but on a subsequent day they might show behaviour which was contradictory.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Other leaders suggested that the purpose of the PDPEF was “to see how the content of the camp is aligned with the goals” or “to track the stages of development of the camp and types of activities”. None of the leaders directly mentioned the “planning” aspect of the form, either for initial planning or for identifcation of areas that needed further work within the programme. One leader talked about a previous programme in which a designated time had been set aside within each leader’s meeting to focus on the progress of a few identifed participants. This had been useful in helping all leaders to be aware of the indicators they should be checking and in identifying areas of the programme that needed further development, but the emphasis had still been on evaluation rather than planning.
Leaders’ views on the purposes of the PDPEF (evaluation of participant progress) were, thus, somewhat tangential to the organisational purpose of the form as a means of monitoring the educational curriculum. This has been noted by members of the education department in CISV and plans are now in hand to draw greater attention to the advisory material already available and to emphasise the organisational importance of the PDPEF in the annual training cycle.
D Summary CISV, as an organisation aiming for continuous improvement, has found it useful to evaluate the implementation of new educational tools. While leaders, perhaps understandably in the light of their other responsibilities, focus on the learning and achievements of the young people for whom they have direct responsibility, the
Experiential learning in youth mobility programmes: a tool to plan, monitor and evaluate
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
188
research identifed a need to train leaders in the broader uses of the PDPEF as a tool for developing the quality of the learning curriculum. Notably, however, the clarifcation of goals and indicators for each of CISV’s educational programmes has given focus to the non-formal curriculum provided and established a structure for evaluating programme quality on which the organisation can continue to build.
D References Editorial (2001), “Competency-based education: The new panacea”, Journal of Nursing Education, pp. 387-8. Gaudet C. H., Annulis H. and Kmiec J. J. (2008), “Building an evaluation framework for a competency based graduate program at the University of Southern Mississippi”, Performance Improvement, pp. 26-37.
Kobuke L., Olsen K. and Renner T. (2007), “Implementing an assessment plan: ACE Internationalization Collaborative”, NAFSA, NAFSA Inc., Los Angeles. McNiff J. and Whitehead J. (2010), You and your action research project, Routledge, London.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Webb L. (2006), “Learning by doing”, Training Journal, pp. 36-41.
Tamara Thorpe, Jennifer Watson
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Wolfgang Ilg
Evaluation of international youth exchanges
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
I
n 2013 the Franco-German Youth Offce celebrates its 50th birthday. The Polish-German Youth Offce, founded after the peaceful revolution in 1989, has existed for more than two decades. The longevity of these two big international youth exchange organisations (accompanied by smaller institutions with similar aims) shows that youth encounters are a well-established way to conduct international youth work in many European countries. It seems obvious that the meeting of two or more groups from different countries for one or two weeks will make an impression on the lives of the young people involved. But what effects do youth encounters have? How can these effects be measured and what can help in evaluating a programme like this? This chapter describes the system of joint self-evaluation which has been introduced since 2005 and was complemented by an “Easy English version” in 2013 (www.eiye.eu). Selected results from the questionnaires are presented and perspectives for further research with the use of these tools are given.
3
In order to understand the idea, a few introductory words about the background are helpful: the basic approach of this evaluation system is shaped by a youth work perspective on international youth encounters. This approach
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
190
contradicts a popular view that reduces youth work activities to additional factors beyond school for improving young people’s capabilities for future economic needs. An example for the economic approach, with key words like “employability” and “human capital”, can be found in the European Commission’s Green Paper “Promoting the learning mobility of young people”, when it states on its frst page: Learning mobility ... is one of the fundamental ways in which individuals, particularly young people, can strengthen their future employability as well as their personal development. Studies confrm that learning mobility adds to human capital ... It can also strengthen Europe’s competitiveness by helping to build a knowledge-intensive society, thereby contributing to the achievement of the objectives set out in the Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs. (Commission 2009)
This is not the way that youth workers perceive their activities with young people in international encounters – and certainly not what a 16-year-old adolescent would describe as his motivation and experience in a youth exchange programme. If one looks at international youth encounters through the eyes of young people, quite different aspects gain importance: young people experience themselves in a new setting, make friends in a group, and get in touch with adolescents from a totally different background. They fall in love with a peer from another country, see how similar and yet different life for youngsters in Europe can be, and learn that a sense of community and caring can bridge cultural and economic gaps. Topics like this are at the core of the evaluation system presented here. This view certainly does not neglect that learning experiences during youth encounters can have a positive effect on professional abilities in young people’s future, but it gives priority to human encounters and not to economic needs – an approach that doesn’t seem to be self-evident these days, but that is vital for keeping up international youth work as a way of (non-formal!) education with its own characteristics.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
D The idea of joint self-evaluation While plenty of complex empirical studies at a very elaborate scientifc level have been carried out in the feld of formal education (schooling and training) in the aftermath of the PISA studies over the past years, studies concerning non-formal educational settings are lagging far behind this state of research. Overviews on the state of research in the non-formal feld demonstrate the growing interest in empirical evaluation research with regard to youth work, but almost all of them are only able to mention regionally limited evaluations with low case numbers, and researchers often restrict themselves to purely qualitative evaluation procedures (overviews for Germany: DJI 2009; Rauschenbach et al. 2010). Only in a few cases has it become possible to undertake a bigger scientifc study – one of the most popular examples is the German study on long-term effects of international youth work (Thomas et al. 2007). Research projects on international youth work with more than 1 000 interviewees are practically not represented at all in European research literature. The same holds true for international databases of scientifc publications. One of the largest studies in the feld has been completed in the United States, but it focuses on camps within that country and has no special focus on international exchange (Thurber et al. 2007).
In practical youth work, there are hardly any established evaluation procedures which meet the quality criteria of reliability and validity important to scientists or
Wolfgang Ilg
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 191
the requirements of practicability, usefulness and simplicity demanded by practitioners. Practitioners of youth work sometimes have strong prejudices towards empirical studies (Lindner 2009). Besides, empirical research usually requires the costly service of researchers and thus expenditures that most youth organisations cannot afford in the long term. Mostly, they rather use playful feedback methods which do not aim at systematic quantifcations of feedback or a written documentation of it (overview: Kloosterman et al. 2007, for the Franco-German Youth Offce see Müller 1996). The aim of the project‚ Freizeitenevaluation (“camp evaluation”) was and is to move on from evaluation methods developed ad hoc in youth group travel activities (not only international youth encounters but also youth camps belong to this category) to a standard practice for generating data and providing an easy-to-use evaluation tool. Since 2001, several evaluation procedures have been developed in the course of this project. They make it possible for the organisers of camps and international youth encounters to self-evaluate their youth travel activities by means of a locally conducted quantitative procedure (overview of the project’s development: Ilg 2013; explanation of the methodology: Ilg 2010; more explanations: www.freizeitenevaluation.de). Through several scientifc studies (Ilg 2008a for camps, Dubiski and Ilg 2008 for international youth encounters, Peters et al. 2011 for children’s camps), questionnaires were created, and later an optimised abridged version was made available for self-evaluation. The standard self-evaluation procedure does not generate any costs and can be used without additional staff.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
In the scientifc studies participants were not only questioned during the camp but surveyed once again three months later in order to ensure reliability and validity. In addition, extensive data on the camp were collected, for example on the structure of the programme. In contrary to this bigger empirical setting, the materials for self-evaluation remain restricted to three elements: the workers’ questionnaires at the beginning, the participants’ questionnaires in the end and a short questionnaire for basic data. The procedure aims, above all, at providing tools for simple and reliable self-evaluation to those in charge locally. Apart from that, the organisers are asked to send the locally collected data to a central offce in order to be able to analyse all of the data at supra-regional level. But it is not possible to exert pressure of any kind on the local organisers to make them send the data. Thus, one particularity of this evaluation procedure is that it attempts to combine the benefts of external evaluation and those of self-evaluation: just like during an external evaluation, the research tools stem from a scientifcally proven development. The quantitative evaluation of the questionnaires is conducted by means of a computer programme and thus delivers results that do not depend on the person responsible for the local evaluation. Still, the evaluation procedure can – which is otherwise only the case with a self-evaluation – be conducted and statistically evaluated independently and locally by the group leaders.
The collected data show the success of the idea of joint self-evaluation: during the years 2005 to 2011 more than 35 000 questionnaires were sent in to the central offce: 31 345 participants’ questionnaires and 4 199 workers’ questionnaires from 1 131 youth travel groups (Figure 1).
Evaluation of international youth exchanges
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
192
Number of participants’ questionnaires per year
Figure 1: Number of participantsÕ questionnaires in the research project Encounters
Youth camps
Children’s camps
7000 6000
1732
5000 941
4000
1794 943
2492
3000 2000 1000 0
1500 2419
817 569
682 0
456 485
2005
2006
2007
1307
2008
2009
3083
3186
2010
2011*
* Data entry for 2012 incomplete at time of publication.
The experiences gained in the frst four years of the application of the standard procedure were re-analysed with the help of the received data. In doing so, the advantages and disadvantages of this joint self-evaluation became apparent. Overall, the results support the idea of collecting data in this way. After only a few years, this system has produced the largest collection of evaluation data in the feld of youth group travel ever. Scientifc analyses, especially a comparison of Cronbach Alpha values between the base studies and the self-evaluation period, prove that the evaluation procedure (handing out questionnaires, instruction, entering data, etc.) can be conducted by untrained people in a way that will not distort the results.
D Selected results
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
For the international youth encounters in the context of French-German and Polish-German youth encounters, the collected data for the years 2005 to 2010 were analysed and published in a book, which is available in German, French and Polish (Ilg and Dubiski 2011). Some selected results from this subsample (N=5 206 participants and 719 leaders) give an impression of the kind of data that are gained with the help of this evaluation tool. The mean age of the participants is 16.7 years. Forty-six percent visit the country where the encounter takes place for the frst time in their life. The groups are typically led by a team of young adults (most of them between 20 and 30 years), of whom the majority work on a voluntary basis. The most important feedback of the participants refers to group-related aspects: 87% report that they have made new friends during the encounter. Four out of fve (80%) agree with the statement “The atmosphere allowed us to talk openly among ourselves.” The three aspects that gain the highest rates of satisfaction are group, youth leaders and fun. The results of the teenagers’ questionnaires show how important the youth group leaders are for them. Most of the participants feel that at least one of the leaders is a person they have confdence in – even if it is a leader who comes from another country. The high regard for the leaders can also be seen by another result in the participants’ questionnaire: more than half of the participants agreed to the item
Wolfgang Ilg
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 193
“I would like to work myself as a youth leader at one of these encounters”. Thus, international youth encounters can be seen as a promising way of strengthening young people’s interest in volunteering for international projects themselves. The fact that three out of four volunteers actually had taken part in encounters during their adolescence shows that many of the earlier participants do, in fact, make their way to leading encounters themselves. Figure 2: Motivation for voluntary work ÒI would like to work myself as a youth leader at one of these encountersÓ No
Participants from Germany
31%
Participants from France
32%
Participants from Poland
17%
10%
45%
17%
20%
30%
Yes
52%
24%
21%
0%
Unclear
63%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90% 100%
One of the major learning felds refers to aspects of intercultural experiences: 81% report that they got in touch with the culture and everyday life of the host region (e.g. food, music, traditions). 74% say that they improved their foreign-language skills. And slightly more (77%) agreed with the statement “I have become interested in learning the other language(s)”. A similar pattern can be found concerning the motivation for future mobility: as Figure 3 shows, between 61% and 76% of the adolescents think about a longer stay in one of the hosting countries after they have got to know it during the one or two weeks of the encounter. This is even more impressive if one keeps in mind that 46% of the participants have never before been in the respective country.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Figure 3: How encounters enhance adolescentsÕ European mobility ÒFollowing this encounter, I could well imagine spending a longer time (at least 3 months) in the partner country/countriesÓ No
Participants from Germany
26%
Participants from France
Participants from Poland
17%
10%
0%
10%
Unclear
13%
61%
15%
68%
14%
20%
Yes
76%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Evaluation of international youth exchanges
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
90% 100%
194
These results mirror only a small fraction of the empirical knowledge collected by the evaluation tool. In the next chapter, even more interesting perspectives for data analysis will be presented.
D Multi-level analyses An important advantage of a very large sample is that such a sample allows for statistical calculations that would not make sense with fewer than 1 000 interviewees. The procedure of multi-level analysis, which is used in this process, has been established over the past years within the framework of the large school achievement studies, in particular the PISA, as an important analysis tool. Nevertheless, it has almost never been used so far due to lack of data with respect to youth work activities. The main concept of multi-level analysis is based on its ability to analyse effects at the individual and the group level at the same time. The background of this method is constituted by complex regression analysis that will not be dealt with in depth here; the results of the multi-level analysis will be explained to readers with no statistical expertise. The data analysed in Table 1 comes from both types of youth group travel: international youth encounters (mainly between groups in Germany, France and Poland, but also with groups from other origins like the Russian Federation or Italy) and youth camps of German groups without an exchange scheme (detailed analysis: Ilg and Diehl 2011). Table 1: Results of the multi-level analysis Learning experiences
Personality
Political refection
Intercultural experiences
++ ––
+
Individual variables age difference for girls difference for adolescents with prior experience difference for French adolescents difference for Polish adolescents difference for adolescents of other nationalities
++ ++ ++
–– ––
++
+
++
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
General group variables difference for international encounters v. camps group size Aims of workers (group level) aim personality aim political refection aim intercultural experiences
++ ++ ++
N=5 136 participants and 973 youth group leaders from a selected sample of youth encounters and youth camps. NB: The data ranked according to ethnicity are represented as the difference from the data of the German adolescents for reasons of simplifcation. + positive interrelation
++ highly positive interrelation
– negative interrelation
– – highly negative interrelation
Wolfgang Ilg
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 195
The table represents crucial insights of multi-level analysis in a compact form. In the three columns on the right, three key learning experiences which potentially are to be gained during camps or encounters are listed as criteria variables (in brackets with an exemplary item): personality (“I discovered new aspects and abilities in myself”), political refection (“I dealt with a number of social/political topics”) and intercultural experiences (“I got to know something about the culture and everyday life of the host region”). The table explains interrelations with the predictors listed in the frst column.
First of all, the individual predictors are represented (Individual variables, no shading, white background). An interrelation between age and experiences of political refection as well as intercultural experiences can be seen. Regarding gender, only one effect is statistically signifcant, namely that boys report a refection on political topics more often than girls. Prior experience, that is, whether the adolescents have already attended a youth travel group or not, does not have any measurable effect on the criteria variables. The signifcance of the country of origin of the adolescents differs depending on the respective criteria. Regarding personality, German adolescents beneft least, while political refection is rather typical for adolescents from Germany and France. When it comes to intercultural experiences, only the values for adolescents from the “other” countries (e.g. in trilateral encounters) are signifcantly higher.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Two predictors were included at group level (General group variables, light grey shading). The group size proves to have little relevance as a predictor. But there are signifcant differences depending on the respective type of travel groups: for international youth encounters, the values regarding political refection and intercultural experiences in particular are signifcantly higher than for youth camps. This result may be considered as a confrmation of the programmatic claim that international youth encounters make a much bigger contribution to understanding strangers because of a direct contact with different countries and cultures than group travel with adolescents from the same country, even if the camp in question takes place in a foreign country, which is usually the case.
One of the most interesting results can be seen in the table under the heading Aims of workers (group level), with the dark grey background. The aims, which were asked for at the beginning of the measure, were aggregated for each measure (i.e. the mean value of all workers was calculated). If it is true that the workers’ aims infuence the events during a camp or encounter, this must lead to specifc interrelations between the workers’ aims and the corresponding experiences of the participants. The data show exactly this pattern – even if other predictors were controlled for within the framework of multi-level analysis as potential confounding variables. All the three aims of the workers lead to a respectively higher level of feedback concerning experiences from the participants. For practitioners in the feld of pedagogy, such fndings might be especially interesting with respect to staff training: The “personal value system” of the workers obviously shapes the learning experiences of the young group members. At the same time, the provable infuence of a conceptual focus on the experiences of the adolescents becomes apparent – an insight that is of crucial importance regarding evidence of the effect of youth work which has rarely been shown in empirical studies to date. Opportunities for future research by means of panel studies As the short description of the research results shows, a dataset with a large number of measures has a huge additional value in comparison to the former studies with a
Evaluation of international youth exchanges
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
196
maximum of approximately 500 interviewees. From a research perspective, a further development of the system of joint self-evaluation described in this chapter seems to be a promising approach. One ambitious goal would be to obtain a clearly defned sub-sample which remains largely unchanged every year. In contrast to the currently “accidentally” submitted data, a fxed database from the same youth organisations would be a reliable database for ongoing changes over time – following the research principle “if you want to measure change, don’t change the measure”.
This idea is the quintessence of a so-called panel study. In concrete terms, one would have to carefully select institutions that consent to co-operate for several years in order to conduct a panel study. If one of those dropped out, it would have to be substituted by an institution with similar data. Even with a number of only about 30 to 40 encounters (approximately 1 000 participants) in such a panel study, reliable monitoring data might be collected for the feld of international youth encounters over the years – this would also offer the opportunity to make multi-level analysis calculations regularly and provide new comparative data for self-evaluation every year. With such a database, changes in the results of this constant partial sample could be interpreted as reliable indicators of real change. If the scientifc community in non-formal learning wants to take a major step in advancing knowledge on youth travel, a panel study based on joint evaluation might be one of the most realistic ways to get there.
D References Commission of the European Communities (2009), “Green Paper: Promoting the learning mobility of young people”, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/ lifelong-learning-policy/doc/mobility/com329_en.pdf, accessed 13 September 2012. DJI 2009 (Deutsches Jugend-Institut/Landesjugendring Nordrhein-Westfalen) (2009), Das Wissen zur Kinder- und Jugendarbeit. Die empirische Forschung 19982008. Ein kommentierter Überblick für die Praxis. Neuss: LJR NRW, available at www.ljr-nrw.de/fleadmin/Dokumente/Publikationen/kinder-und-jugendarbeit120809.pdf, accessed 13 September 2012.
Dubiski J. and Ilg W. (eds) (2008), Evaluation Internationaler Jugendbegegnungen. Ein Verfahren zur Auswertung von Begegnungen, DFJW und DPJW, Berlin.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Dubiski J. and Ilg W. (eds) (2008), Ewaluacja miedzynarodowych spotkan mlodziezy. Metoda ewaluacji spotkan miedzynarodowych, PNWM, Warsaw.
Dubiski J. and Ilg W. (eds) (2008), Evaluation des rencontres internationales de jeunes. Un outil pour l’évaluation des rencontres, OFAJ, Paris.
Ilg W. (2008a), Evaluation von Freizeiten und Jugendreisen. Einführung und Ergebnisse zum bundesweiten Standard-Verfahren, aej, Hannover. Ilg W. (2010), Freizeitenevaluation. Entwicklung eines Evaluationskonzepts für Freizeiten in der kirchlichen Jugendarbeit, VDM-Verlag, Saarbrücken.
Ilg W. (2013), Vernetzte Selbstevaluation von Jugendgruppenfahrten – Wissenschaft und Praxis proftieren. in: IJAB / Forscher-Praktiker-Dialog (eds): Internationale Jugendarbeit wirkt. Forschungsergebnisse im Überblick. Zweite Aufage. Bonn/ Köln, pp. 195-214.
Wolfgang Ilg
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 197
Ilg W. and Diehl M. (2011), “Jugendgruppenfahrten im Spiegel mehrebenenanalytischer Untersuchungen. Erfahrungen mit vernetzter Selbstevaluation in non-formalen Bildungssettings”, Zeitschrift für Evaluation, 10(2), pp. 225-48. Ilg W. and Dubiski J. (2011), Begegnung schafft Perspektiven. Empirische Einblicke in internationale Jugendbegegnungen, Deutsch-Französisches Jugendwerk und Deutsch-Polnisches Jugendwerk, Berlin/Paris/Warschau, available at www.eijb.eu, accessed 13 September 2012.
Ilg W. and Dubiski J. (2011), Les échanges ouvrent des perspectives. Un aperçu empirique des rencontres internationales de jeunes, Offce franco-allemand pour la Jeunesse (OFAJ) and Offce germano-polonais pour la Jeunesse (OGPJ), Berlin/ Paris/Warsaw, available at www.erij.eu, accessed 13 September 2012. Ilg W. and Dubiski J. (2011), Spotkanie otwiera perspektywy. Empiryczne spojrzenie na mie˛dzynarodowa˛ wymiane˛ młodziez˙y, Publikacja Polsko-Niemieckiej Współpracy Młodziez˙y (PNWM) i Francusko-Niemieckiej Współpracy Młodziez˙y (FNWM), Berlin/Paris/Warsaw, available at www.emsm.eu, accessed 13 September 2012.
Kloosterman P., Giebel K., and Senyuva O. (2007), T-Kit No. 10. Educational evaluation in youth work, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. Lindner W. (ed.) (2009), Kinder- und Jugendarbeit wirkt. Aktuelle und ausgewählte Evaluationsergebnisse der Kinder- und Jugendarbeit, VS Verlag, Wiesbaden. Müller B. (1996), Evaluation internationaler Begegnungen. Eine erste perspektivische Beleuchtung der Probleme von Auswertungsmethoden im Bereich des interkulturellen Lernens, Arbeitstexte 12 (Neuaufage), Deutsch-Französisches Jugendwerk, Bad Honnef.
Peters H. et al. (2011), Evaluation von Kinderfreizeiten. Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen, Ergebnisse und Anleitung zur eigenen Durchführung, Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Evangelischen Jugend, Hannover.
Rauschenbach Th. et al. (2010), Lage und Zukunft der Kinder- und Jugendarbeit in Baden-Württemberg. Eine Expertise, Deutsches Jugendinstitut, Dortmund u.a.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Thomas A., Chang C. and Abt H. (2007), Erlebnisse, die verändern. Langzeitwirkungen der Teilnahme an internationalen Jugendbegegnungen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen. Thurber Ch. et al. (2007), “Youth development outcomes of the camp experience: Evidence for multidimensional growth”, Journal of youth and adolescence; a multidisciplinary research publication, 36 (3), 241-54.
Evaluation of international youth exchanges
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 199
List of abstracts I Ð Developments and political framework 2
Learning mobility in the youth feld: starting to set a framework Charles Berg, Marianne Milmeister, Christiane Weis Keywords: learning mobility, European youth research, social science
This contribution presents an overture to future EPLM debates from a researcher’s perspective. It describes three possible points of entry: the European youth research landscape, the changing concepts of mobility and learning as well as considerations regarding innovation in research methods. One of the conclusions is that EPLM is related to an in-depth transformation of social science. 3
European Union support to learning mobility: rationale of a success Pascal Lejeune Key words: non-formal learning mobility, European programmes, Youth in Action, Erasmus for All, Youth on the Move
Since the mid-1980s, transnational learning mobility has been a European success story. In the youth feld, the current Youth in Action Programme supports youth exchanges and volunteering opportunities among other non-formal activities aimed at contributing to youth employability, active participation in society and a sense of belonging to the European Union.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
4
Advocating for youth: the European Youth Forum helping to increase recognition of mobility and non-formal learning David Garrahy Key words: European Youth Forum, learning mobility, recognition of nonformal education, quality assurance
The article outlines core areas of activity of the European Youth Forum as a key stakeholder in the European education and mobility debate: working towards the further removal of (visa) barriers to young people’s learning mobility, and advocating the recognition of non-formal education in political circles, in position papers and by means of developing a Quality Assurance Framework for non-formal learning activities. 5
Youth mobilities, step by step Majo Hansotte Key words: Obstacles to mobility, Rating scale for mobility, Mobility barriers, and daily living conditions
The approach to mobility developed here is part of a global policy for non-formal education. The originality of this chapter lies in a pluralistic view of youth mobility that includes the identifcation of obstacles. Youth actors in Wallonia and Brussels
List of abstracts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
200
have indeed developed a “rating scale for mobility” that could frame the practices encountered. The principle of this step-by-step approach is based on the fact that mobility barriers are rooted both in the minds of youth and daily living conditions; when young people start to step into the existing mobility programmes, we can consider that the main obstacles have been overcome.
Therefore it is important to set up non-formal education procedures for disadvantaged young people in particular (but non-exclusively), including training them to move, and to adapt to living at a distance from their family, daily habits, community and home territory, including the patterns imposed by family, culture, environment and religion. 6
Cross-border youth mobility, meeting the neighbours, learning from each other: international exchanges of young Poles and their peers from abroad Aleksandra Karlin´ska Key words: youth exchange, intercultural dialogue, national programme
This chapter presents the most important existing state schemes of international youth co-operation enabling youth exchanges. Most of them are based on bilateral agreements signed by Polish authorities and representatives of partner countries (Germany, Lithuania, Russian Federation, Ukraine), which constitute a legal basis and precise ways to fnancially support co-operation. Each presented scheme provides information on the scope and number of realised projects and the results achieved.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
7
Learning mobility in the youth feld: the Estonian experience with a European imprint Reet Kost Key words: Estonia, non-formal learning, mobility, European identity, Youth in Action, youth work
This chapter unfolds the Estonian experience of learning mobility in the youth feld by looking at the historic, political and strategic aspects of the developments so far and the consequences of the choices made to the youth feld and young people in particular. It focuses on European infuence on national youth policy and youth work development, concluding that learning mobility in the youth feld would probably not have come that far in Estonia without the support of European institutions, co-operation and the EU contribution to the decentralised implementation of the EU youth programmes.
8
What are the effects of international youth mobility projects? Research-based analysis of Youth in Action Helmut Fennes Key words: youth mobility, non-formal learning, informal learning, European youth projects, youth research
This chapter presents an international research project on the effects of European youth projects on the actors involved – young people, youth workers and youth leaders, but also on youth groups, organisations and communities concerned. It outlines the concept and methodology as well as main results of this research project, conducted in 15 European countries between 2008 and 2013.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 201
II Ð Concepts and approaches concerning mobility and learning 9
International youth work in Germany Andreas Thimmel Key words: international youth work, non-formal learning, research in youth work, intercultural learning
This chapter outlines different concepts of international youth work in Germany. It aims at defning international youth work from a scientifc point of view as it has developed in practice and theory and how it is still developing.
Structural characteristics for international youth work are described frst. The concept of international youth work is evaluated from different perspectives such as foreign affairs, social policy, political formation, youth and leisure education, identity formation, economy and individual interaction between people from different countries. Furthermore, a reference is made to the scientifc discourse on international youth work, which is mainly infuenced by education and psychology. The chapter’s focus lies in a systematic approach to different concepts and their historical contribution to international youth work. It deals with the following concepts: country-specifc concepts, intercultural learning, a psychological approach (psychologische Austauschforschung), the hermeneutic-psychoanalytical concept, socio-pedagogical concepts focusing on identity formation and interculturality, international learning stressing the political dimension, and a concept claiming empathy as a basis for international understanding.
In conclusion, a defnition is suggested which characterises international youth work as an umbrella term for any pedagogical activities and settings in children and youth work linked to internationality.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The chapter also discusses the actual challenges of international youth work. It shows that within the past 10 years international youth work has been considering major issues such as youth education, migration and diversity, as well as European and political dimensions, and has therefore positioned itself as a central feld of non-formal education. The chapter provides an important basis for the understanding of theory and practice of international youth work in Germany. 10
A comparative framework for youth mobility Günter J. Friesenhahn Key words: comparison, youth, mobility, contextualisation
Within the EU, youth affairs have been gaining in importance for some years. Action programmes with the objective to enhance the mobility of young people are at the heart of EU strategies. Mobility is regarded as important for personal development and employability. Mobility is connected with cross-border activities and requires comparative competences.
List of abstracts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
202
11
Preconditions for movement in Portugal and Ireland: social inequality, mobility feld and habitus David Cairns Key words: Youth, mobility, Ireland, Portugal, habitus
This chapter explores mobility decision making in Portugal and Ireland, utilising “habitus” to help explain informal learning practices, with empirical evidence drawn from research with student respondents. This work was carried out in the aftermath of the global fnancial crisis, providing an opportunity to assess the impact of this event on mobility orientations. 12
Mobility as a pedagogical tool for young people with fewer opportunities Søren Kristensen Key words: Learning mobility, disadvantaged groups, informal learning
Young people with fewer opportunities constitute a prioritised target group in many European schemes for learning mobility. However, the insertion of fragile young people in mobility projects designed for mainstream youth is not unproblematic. Rather than a concern for equal opportunities, our primary motivation should therefore be refections about mobility as a pedagogical tool: what outcomes in terms of learning and personal development can we realistically achieve, and what interventions in terms of organisation and support are needed to underpin this? The chapter discusses these issues on the basis of relevant theory, research and practice.
13
Challenges for recognition of non-formal learning and learning mobility in Ukraine: education, labour market and society Yaryna Borenko, Galyna Usatenko Key words: Ukraine, education in transition, non-formal education in Eastern Europe, migration of young professionals
Ukraine is on the way to inclusion into European mobility programmes. However, the current crisis of the system of education has created threats to the long-term emigration of young professionals. With regard to the social dimension, learning mobility still remains exclusive and elitist. The educational tradition creates a gap between formal and non-formal education, whereby non-formal learning remains a separate domain of non-state actors.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
14
Youth mobility: towards more self-directed and holistic learning Marta Brzezin´ska-Hubert Key words: non-formal learning, adult learning theory, self-directed learning, communities of practice
This chapter attempts to examine how European youth mobility programmes may stimulate self-directed and holistic learning. The frst part deals with the characteristics and interrelations of informal, formal and non-formal education. The second part takes the theoretical framework of self-directed learning and context-based learning approaches to analyse the practical implications for an individual young learner.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 203
15
What do we know? A systematic literature review on youth learning mobility in European contexts Judith Dubiski Key words: European research, literature review, systematic research, learning mobility, youth, non-formal
Research on youth learning mobility is conducted all over Europe, but although it deals with an international topic, we know little about what researchers from other countries work on and what their results are. There is hardly any source that can provide comprehensive information on outcomes, relevant issues, dominant questions or the use of specifc terms in different countries. This chapter presents fndings of a systematic literature review on international youth mobility in non-formal educational contexts. The review covered studies on short-stay and long-stay, individual and group programmes for young people from 13 to 30 years in non-formal contexts, that is international youth encounters, work camps, au pair, voluntary service and trainings for non-professional youth workers. The results indicate that the fundamental task is to discuss and establish a more consistent use of terms on an international level in order to create a common space for research and discourse.
III Ð Good practice and project reports 16
European youth mobility and inclusion among those with fewer opportunities through three mechanisms Nagla Abed, Judith van Raalten Key words: immigrants, disadvantaged youth, inclusion quota, marginalised communities, promotion of mobility, alumni, peer-to-peer approach, outreach initiative, mobility interest teams, ambassador, minority groups
This chapter proposes mechanisms for the involved stakeholders to ensure the inclusion of socially marginalised youth across Europe in mobility programmes to beneft from the offered learning experiences.
First, youth work and mobility programmes should introduce quotas to guarantee the participation of young people with fewer opportunities.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Second, participating young people have access to other networks that often remain untapped. Designed programmes should not only make an effort to ensure innovation and sustainability, but also justify how proposed designs ensure that young people not directly affliated to mobility projects get connected to be included in new mobility projects. Third, each European country deals with minorities whose youth have roots in neighbouring countries. Mobility programmes will beneft greatly by exposing this group of young people to share best practices between Europeans and neighbours, and strengthen mutual understanding.
List of abstracts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
204
17
Sharing the mobility experience: creating more effect. Comparison of the effects on young people of two Dutch learning mobility programmes Lorance Janssen, Nienke Nuyens Key words: Learning mobility experience, sharing, young people, Erasmus for All
Two Dutch learning mobility programmes are compared on their outcome. The authors argue that the “sharing activities” in the Xplore programme deepen the learning effects of the learning mobility experience. Therefore, they recommend that such a concept be included in the future Erasmus for All learning mobility programme. 18
Opening talent in young people: the role of non-formal learning in the UK Foyer Network Steve Hillman Key words: Foyers, Lifeskills, Adulthood, Coaching
This chapter describes how the non-formal learning programmes in the UK Foyer Network facilitate the transition to independent adulthood. It explores how such programmes promote learning mobility for young people, how social media can be used to good effect, and outlines the contribution of Foyer programmes in the national and European policy contexts. 19
Facilitating learning mobility for all: the JiVE experience Bettina Wissing Key words: Young people with fewer opportunities, Potential of international youth work, EU Youth Strategy, Co-operation of formal and non-formal education, Local networks
The JiVE initiative takes up the positive and long-term effects and potential of international youth work on personality development and acquisition of intercultural skills of young people that have been proven by recent research. Creating networks and new partnerships at local levels and between different providers of facilities for young people is put into practice with the Kommune goes International sub-initiative.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
20
EFILÕs European Citizenship Trimester Programme: from global to European Active Citizenship Elisa Briga Key words: intercultural learning, European citizenship, pupil exchanges, AFS
The European Federation for Intercultural Learning (EFIL), the umbrella organisation of AFS organisations in Europe, in 2008, explored the possibility of actively contributing to the promotion of the European ideal through its expertise on pupil exchanges. The European Citizenship Trimester Programme (ECTP) was born. Can an international youth organisation promoting intercultural learning with a global perspective have a successful programme with a European focus? What are the challenges to face and the contributions it can bring?
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 205
21
Youthpass the educational practice Rita Bergstein, Kristiina Pernits Key words: Youthpass, self-directed learning, transformative learning, recognition
The European recognition instrument for youth work activities, Youthpass and the Youthpass process have existed since 2007. The chapter conceptualises the Youthpass process in the light of self-directed and transformative learning concepts, known and applied foremost in adult education. The authors argue that the Youthpass process is closely related to these widespread learning concepts which describe the prerequisites to sustainable development of competences within lifelong learners. 22
Experiential learning in youth mobility programmes: a tool to plan, monitor and evaluate Tamara Thorpe, Jennifer Watson Key words: CISV International, Evaluation, Experiential Learning, Nonformal Education, Youth Mobility
Children’s International Summer Villages (CISV International) have been offering programmes for youth participants for over 60 years. The organisation recently developed a new tool to facilitate planning, monitoring and evaluation of its educational content. A research project to monitor the implementation of this new tool was conducted and has indicated areas where further leadership training may make use of it more effectively. 23
Evaluation of international youth exchanges Wolfgang Ilg Key words: evaluation, youth exchange, empirical research, multi-level analysis, panel study
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
The chapter describes selected results of an evaluation project based on more than 25 000 questionnaires from participants and workers in camps and youth encounters in Europe. With the model of “joint self-evaluation”, invented by the scientifc project Freizeitenevaluation, an easy-to-use tool for quantitative evaluation is presented. The author explains the use of multi-level analysis and recommends panel studies for future research.
List of abstracts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 207
List of editors and authors (in alphabetical order) Nagla Abed Nagla Abed is a consultant in the felds of culture/gender and development. She studied law and holds MA degrees in Euroculture from the University of Göttingen and the University of Groningen. She analysed the development policy of the EU to support women’s empowerment through non-governmental organisations in the MENA Region. She has acquired experience in Brussels, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and the Gaza Strip. She is currently working for the Anna Lindh Foundation in Alexandria. Her recent project is the Citizens Exchange Programme, which supports South-South and South-North exchange between civil society organisations in the Euro-Med region. As consultant she has been developing culturally sensitive projects to promote dialogue between cultures in different felds. Judit Balogh Judit Balogh lives in Budapest, Hungary and works as a project manager and freelance trainer in the youth feld. She was the Head of the Hungarian National Agency of the Youth in Action Programme between 2009 and 2012, and in this position aimed at creating an environment that supports dialogue among policy makers, practitioners and researchers working in the youth sector. Her main focus is fostering youth participation in democratic life and promoting the use and recognition of non-formal learning.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Charles Berg Associate Professor at the University of Luxembourg (Centre d’études sur la situation des jeunes, CESIJE), educationalist, trained at the Universities of Marburg, Tübingen and Trier, co-founder of CESIJE, member of the Pool of European Youth Researchers (PEYR). Research domains: research methodology, educational sociology, multilingualism and literacy, intergenerational relationships, youth studies. Rita Bergstein Rita Bergstein lives in Germany (Cologne) with her family. She has been working for the SALTO Training and Cooperation Resource Centre since 2005, focusing on Youthpass and the recognition of non-formal learning. She has a background as trainer, facilitator, social worker and project manager at national and international levels. She is interested in systemic thinking and learning in its various dimensions, and believes in possibilities for change. Yaryna Borenko Expert in educational and youth policy, intercultural learning, non-formal education and volunteering, trainer in the international youth feld, co-ordinator of WG 4 (contacts between people) of the National Platform of Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum, PhD in Political Science.
List of editors and authors
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
208
Marta Brzezin«ska-Hubert A Sociology and European Studies graduate, since 2005 Marta has been involved in education and training in the international youth feld. Member of the Polish Youth in Action pool of trainers, co-author and editor of several publications for young people. Passionate about intercultural education, self-directed learning and “off the beaten path” learning approaches. Elisa Briga Elisa Briga holds an MA in International Relations (University of Trieste) with a thesis on youth mobility. She is currently working as Programme, Project and Advocacy Co-ordinator for EFIL. In the past, she has worked at the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy at the EU-Council of Europe youth partnership. She volunteers for the international youth organisation CISV, focusing on Peace Education. David Cairns Dr David Cairns is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Research and Studies in Sociology (CIES-IUL), funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology’s (FCT) Ciência 2008 programme. Previously, he was a Senior Research Associate at the Institute of Social Sciences, University of Lisbon (ICS-UL). His main research interests are in the areas of youth and migration, in particular from comparative European perspectives, with numerous publications to date, including articles in International Migration, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Journal of Youth Studies and Young.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Judith Dubiski Judith Dubiski, MA studied sociology and education in Heidelberg and Münster. She is a scientifc staff member at the research centre “Non-formal education” at the Cologne University of Applied Sciences and is working as a freelance researcher and trainer in the evaluation of (international) youth work and empirical social research. Helmut Fennes Helmut Fennes is a researcher and lecturer at the Institute of Educational Science, University of Innsbruck (www.uibk.ac.at/iezw), with a special focus on non-formal education/learning, intercultural learning, citizenship education and youth affairs. He is an expert on international youth work, including at the Council of Europe’s Directorate of Youth and Sports and as former Director of the Intercultural Centre in Vienna. His professional experience includes the development and implementation of numerous national and international research projects as well as seminars and training courses for teachers, youth workers, youth leaders and trainers in Europe and in the Middle East. GŸnter J. Friesenhahn Dr Günter J. Friesenhahn is Professor of European Community Education Studies and Dean of the Faculty of Social Studies at the University of Applied Sciences in Koblenz/Germany. Currently, he is Vice President of the European Association of Schools of Social Work – EASSW. He is co-founder of the Research-PracticeDialogue International Youth Work. His teaching and research areas are: social professions in Europe, international youth work and diversity studies. David Garrahy Policy and Advocacy Co-ordinator at the European Youth Forum, manages the Policy Department and advocates on issues regarding volunteering and non-formal education for young people.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 209
Majo Hansotte Trainer and researcher, she is the author of a thesis on the modern public space “Les intelligences citoyennes” (De Boeck 2005, 2nd edition). She has designed several methodological guidelines including ground-based concerns. She is in charge of a mission in the feld of citizenship for the Bureau International Jeunesse and the DG for Culture (Wallonia-Brussels). Steve Hillman Steve Hillman has worked for over a decade on the design, development and delivery of learning programmes for vulnerable young people, many of whom have experience of homelessness, the care system and the youth justice system. As Director of Policy and Resources for the UK Foyer Federation, he has worked with a variety of government bodies and public and voluntary sector providers to research and identify best practice in learning for young people, most recently researching best practice for the Department for Education on enhanced housing support programmes for teenage parents. Wolfgang Ilg Wolfgang Ilg, Dr. rer. nat., Dipl.-Theol., Dipl.-Psych., Research Associate at the University of Tübingen/Germany. Research interests in non-formal learning, especially international youth encounters (Germany, France, Poland; www.eijb.eu) and confrmation work by the Protestant churches (research projects with Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Poland and Hungary; www.confrmation-research.eu). Lorance Janssen Lorance Janssen, MSc is head of the National Agency for the Youth in Action Programme in the Netherlands. As project manager she was responsible for the Xplore learning mobility programme from 2005 to 2009. She also works for the Netherlands Youth Institute, the Dutch national institute for compiling, verifying and disseminating knowledge on children, youth and families.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Aleksandra Karlin«ska Since 2009 she has been working in the Ministry of Education of Poland, currently as Senior Expert in the International Cooperation Department. Her main focus is in the felds of youth policy and youth information, and international youth co-operation in the framework of the European Union and the Council of Europe. She also deals with public calls for projects of international youth exchanges. Reet Kost Head of the Estonian National Agency for the EU Youth in Action Programme and the preceding programmes. Actively engaged in the European youth feld as youth leader, trainer, developer and manager since 1992. Member of national and European expert groups in the feld of training and quality of youth work as well as European youth policy. Trained as a lawyer at Tartu University and in the feld of intergovernmental relations at New York University Wagner School of Public Service. Currently going through further studies in the feld of the European Union at Tartu University. S¿ren Kristensen Søren Kristensen is a Danish freelance researcher who has written extensively about learning mobility on the basis of both his research and his practical experience as a project organiser. In 2004, he defended his PhD thesis (“Learning by Leaving”) on mobility as a pedagogical tool in vocational education and training. He has
List of editors and authors
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
210
participated in several major European-level studies on mobility in the feld of education, training and youth, and is frequently used as an evaluator of mobility programmes and projects. Pascal Lejeune Pascal Lejeune joined the European Commission in 1986, after management studies in Ecole Supérieure de Commerce de Paris. After a frst position in the DirectorateGeneral for Budget he moved to the current Directorate-General for Education and Culture. From 2006 to 2012, he was Head of the Unit in charge of the Youth in Action Programme. Since January 2013 he has been Head of the Youth Unit, in charge of EU Policy and Programme in the youth feld. Marianne Milmeister Researcher at the University of Luxembourg (Centre d’études sur la situation des jeunes, CESIJE), sociologist, trained at the University of Trier, Luxembourg’s correspondent of the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP). Research domains: youth studies with an emphasis on health, intergenerational relationships, mobility, co-operation in research, policy and practice. Nienke Nuyens Nienke Nuyens, MSc is project manager of SBOS, a Dutch learning mobility programme that started in 2010, and project manager of the European information service Eurodesk. As a communication advisor, she was involved in the Xplore and Youth in Action programmes. She also works for the Netherlands Youth Institute, the Dutch national institute for compiling, verifying and disseminating knowledge on children, youth and families.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Kristiina Pernits Kristiina Pernits is an Estonian currently living and working in Germany at the SALTO Training and Cooperation Resource Centre. Beforehand she worked on Youth in Action, Youthpass and recognition of non-formal learning in Estonia. Grateful also for her formal studies in psychology and adult education, she considers her non-formal learning experiences as life-changing. Hanjo Schild Hans Joachim (Hanjo) Schild, a German, currently lives in Strasbourg and is a team member of the partnership between the European Commission and the Council of Europe in the feld of youth. Prior to this he worked, among others, for the Youth Policy Department of the European Commission in Brussels, as a consultant for international projects in the feld of youth, vocational education and training, employment and social inclusion in Berlin and as a youth worker and trainer. Andreas Thimmel Andreas Thimmel is Professor for Sciences of Social Work at the Cologne University of Applied Sciences. He is head of the research centre “Non-formal Education” and director of the Institute of Childhood, Youth, Family and Adults. He is mainly working on issues regarding the topics of international youth work, intercultural youth work, European youth policy, youth associations, political education and co-operation between youth work and schools. He’s been accompanying the feld of international youth work for several years as a researcher and expert and is co-founder of the Research-Practice-Dialogue International Youth Work.
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
23 211
Tamara Thorpe Tamara Thorpe, MA has extensive experience in international education and exchanges. She has conducted studies on learning outcomes of intercultural exchanges, overseen the implementation of a new approach to evaluation in CISV programmes and is currently the chair of the CISV Evaluation and Research Committee. Judith van Raalten MA Political Science (Brandeis University, USA), MA Philosophy (Utrecht University, Netherlands). Judith is co-founder and associate director of Leaders of Tomorrow, a youth-led non-proft organisation in Amman, Jordan. She is a researcher with expertise in youth empowerment, refugee and identity issues and social development in the MENA region with access to an extensive network of European and Middle Eastern experts, academics, and young professionals. In 2009-2010 she was a Fulbright fellow to Jordan. She is widely travelled and has worked on youth programmes in Jordan, including exchanges with Europe, for many years, and has a deep understanding of cultural complexities in the MENA region. Jennifer Watson Jennifer Watson, M Ed, has previously undertaken research into the long-term effects of CISV participation. Her current research is related to the implementation of new educational resources in CISV. Christiane Weis Researcher at the University of Luxembourg (Centre d’études sur la situation des jeunes, CESIJE), sociologist, trained at the University of Brussels (ULB). Research domains: educational sociology, youth research, policy relevance of social sciences, language learning in multilingual and diverse contexts.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
Hans-Georg Wicke Social scientist, since 1995, he has been Head of JUGEND für Europa, the German National Agency for the Youth in Action Programme and Centre for European Youth Policy and Youth Work. Main areas of work: support of European co-operation in the youth feld, development of a European dimension in youth work and the support of non-formal and informal learning experiences for young people by means of transnational learning mobility. Previously, he was managing director of the Association for International Education and Exchange (IBB) in Dortmund. Bettina Wissing Bettina Wissing studied European Studies and Applied Foreign Languages in Osnabrück (Germany) and Angers (France). Co-ordinator of the youth-policy initiative Kommune goes International and of the Language Service at IJAB – International Youth Service of the Federal Republic of Germany, Bonn.
List of editors and authors
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Sales agents for publications of the Council of Europe Agents de vente des publications du Conseil de l’Europe BELGIUM/BELGIQUE La Librairie Européenne The European Bookshop Rue de l’Orme, 1 BE-1040 BRUXELLES Tel.: +32 (0)2 231 04 35 Fax: +32 (0)2 735 08 60 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.libeurop.be
FInLAnd/FInLAndE Akateeminen Kirjakauppa PO Box 128 Keskuskatu 1 Fi-00100 HELSiNKi Tel.: +358 (0)9 121 4430 Fax: +358 (0)9 121 4242 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.akateeminen.com
Jean De Lannoy/DL Services Avenue du Roi 202 Koningslaan BE-1190 BRUXELLES Tel.: +32 (0)2 538 43 08 Fax: +32 (0)2 538 08 41 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.jean-de-lannoy.be
FrAnCE La Documentation française DiLA – Administration des ventes 23 rue d’Estrées CS10733 FR-75345 PARiS cedex 07 Tel.: +33 (0)1 40 15 70 00 Fax: +33 (0)1 40 15 70 01 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr
BoSnIA And HErzEGovInA/ BoSnIE-HErzéGovInE Robert’s Plus d.o.o. Marka Maruliça 2/V BA-71000 SARAJEVO Tel.: + 387 33 640 818 Fax: + 387 33 640 818 E-mail: [email protected]
CAnAdA Renouf Publishing Co. Ltd. 22-1010 Polytek Street CDN-OTTAWA, ONT K1J 9J1 Tel.: +1 613 745 2665 Fax: +1 613 745 7660 Toll-Free Tel.: (866) 767-6766 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.renoufbooks.com
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
CroAtIA/CroAtIE Robert’s Plus d.o.o. Marasoviçeva 67 HR-21000 SPLiT Tel.: + 385 21 315 800, 801, 802, 803 Fax: + 385 21 315 804 E-mail: [email protected]
CzECH rEPUBLIC/ réPUBLIQUE tCHÈQUE Suweco CZ, s.r.o. Klecakova 347 CZ-180 21 PRAHA 9 Tel.: +420 2 424 59 204 Fax: +420 2 848 21 646 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.suweco.cz
dEnMArK/dAnEMArK GAD Vimmelskaftet 32 DK-1161 KØBENHAVN K Tel.: +45 77 66 60 00 Fax: +45 77 66 60 01 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.gad.dk
Librairie Kléber 1 rue des Francs-Bourgeois FR-67000 STRASBOURG Tel.: +33 (0)3 88 15 78 88 Fax: +33 (0)3 88 15 78 80 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.librairie-kleber.com
GErMAnY/ALLEMAGnE AUStrIA/AUtrICHE W. Bertelsmann Verlag Gmbh @ Co KG Auf dem Esch 4 D-33619 BiELEFELD Tel.: +49 521 91101 13 Fax: +49 521 91101 19 E-mail: [email protected] www.uno-verlag.de
GrEECE/GrÈCE Librairie Kauffmann s.a. Stadiou 28 GR-105 64 ATHiNAi Tel.: +30 210 32 55 321 Fax.: +30 210 32 30 320 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.kauffmann.gr
HUnGArY/HonGrIE Euro info Service Pannónia u. 58. PF. 1039 HU-1136 BUDAPEST Tel.: +36 1 329 2170 Fax: +36 1 349 2053 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.euroinfo.hu
ItALY/ItALIE Licosa SpA Via Duca di Calabria, 1/1 iT-50125 FiRENZE Tel.: +39 0556 483215 Fax: +39 0556 41257 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.licosa.com
norWAY/norvÈGE Akademika Postboks 84 Blindern NO-0314 OSLO Tel.: +47 2 218 8100 Fax: +47 2 218 8103 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.akademika.no
PoLAnd/PoLoGnE Ars Polona JSC 25 Obroncow Street PL-03-933 WARSZAWA Tel.: +48 (0)22 509 86 00 Fax: +48 (0)22 509 86 10 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.arspolona.com.pl
PortUGAL Marka Lda Rua dos Correeiros 61-3 PT-1100-162 LiSBOA Tel: 351 21 3224040 Fax: 351 21 3224044 Web: www.marka.pt E mail: [email protected]
rUSSIAn FEdErAtIon/ FédérAtIon dE rUSSIE Ves Mir 17b, Butlerova ul. - Offce 338 RU-117342 MOSCOW Tel.: +7 495 739 0971 Fax: +7 495 739 0971 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.vesmirbooks.ru
SWItzErLAnd/SUISSE Planetis Sàrl 16 chemin des Pins CH-1273 ARZiER Tel.: +41 22 366 51 77 Fax: +41 22 366 51 78 E-mail: [email protected]
UnItEd KInGdoM/roYAUME-UnI The Stationery Offce Ltd PO Box 29 GB-NORWiCH NR3 1GN Tel.: +44 (0)870 600 5522 Fax: +44 (0)870 600 5533 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.tsoshop.co.uk
UnItEd StAtES and CAnAdA/ étAtS-UnIS et CAnAdA Manhattan Publishing Co 670 White Plains Road USA-10583 SCARSDALE, NY Tel: + 1 914 472 4650 Fax: +1 914 472 4316 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.manhattanpublishing.com
Council of Europe Publishing/Editions du Conseil de l’Europe FR-67075 STRASBOURG Cedex Tel.: +33 (0)3 88 41 25 81 – Fax: +33 (0)3 88 41 39 10 – E-mail: [email protected] – Website: http://book.coe.int
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
Policies, approaches and examples
M
obility is considered to be important for the personal development and employability of young people, as well as for intercultural dialogue, participation and active citizenship. Learning mobility in the youth feld focuses on non-formal learning as a relevant part of youth work, with links to informal learning as well as to formal education. Diferent stakeholders at European level, particularly the Council of Europe and the European Commission, but also individual member states, foster programmes and strategies to enhance the mobility of young people, and particularly the learning dimension in mobility schemes. This book on learning mobility is a joint Council of Europe and European Commission publication, and provides texts of an academic, scientifc, political and practical nature for all stakeholders in the youth feld – youth leaders and youth workers, policy makers, researchers and so on. It should contribute to dialogue and co-operation between relevant players and to discussion on the further development and purpose of youth mobility schemes and their outcomes for young people.
http://youth-par outh-partnership-eu.coe.int
Copyright © 2012. Council of Europe. All rights reserved.
youth-par [email protected]
www.coe.int
The Council of Europe has 47 member states, covering virtually the entire continent of Europe. It seeks to develop common democratic and legal principles based on the European Convention on Human Rights and other reference texts on the protection of individuals. Ever since it was founded in 1949, in the aftermath of the Second World War, the Council of Europe has symbolised reconciliation. The European Union is a unique economic and political partnership between 27 democratic European countries. Its aims are peace, prosperity and freedom for its 500 million citizens – in a fairer, safer world. To make things happen, EU countries set up bodies to run the EU and adopt its legislation. The main ones are the European Parliament (representing the people of Europe), the Council of the European Union (representing national governments) and the European Commission (representing the common EU interest).
ISBN 978-92-871-7636-3
€29/US$58
http://book.coe.int Council of Europe Publishing
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts : Policies, approaches and examples, Council of Europe, 2012.
PREMS 240312
Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts